I love Emacs, but I don't see how a Lisp platform with a web browser, a Tetris implementation, and 4 terminal emulators (shell, term, ansi-term, eshell) can be considered 'lightweight'.
Notepad was just a wrapper around some default win32 controls. Judging alone by exe size is not right, although probably a “statically linked” notepad would still be smaller than emacs
Anything with a scripting engine isn't lightweight compared to (classic) Notepad!
(Also, a lot of that stuff comes bundled with Emacs out-of-the-box, further disqualifying it. Having a scripting engine is one thing, but having a scripting engine along with the whole rest of the jet is something else entirely!)
Well, GNU Kawa is named after the Polish word for coffee (going with a play on Java rather than a play on Scheme like Guile and Larceny EDIT: and Gambit went with).
A well known quantum computing company's entire stack runs on SBCL, with Emacs in production... works really well, don't knock it until you've tried it. Phenomenal REPL.
I'm well aware of what the comic implies (and explicitly says--note that both the comic and the tooltip are about demonstrating and explaining, not just going "diet coke and mentos" and then dinging people for not understanding what that implies), but I can't mind read the intent of the person who posted it and what they intend to tell me by doing so. My original complaint here was about just posting a link without commentary, and the same applies to the XKCD comic link ... and even to your own comment, which is pure ad hominem.
I suspect, but can't know, that people misunderstood my use of "10,000"--the XKCD meaning was used above by tmtvl, which is why I said to read the thread because it's not clear that people were aware of that oblique reference to the XKCD panel--my use of it was a riff, using the same number in a different, even opposite, way ... it's a rhetorical device (derived from a musical one).
I've only used GNU/Linux since 2012, but I do think we have to face the fact that there is a fair amount of ~~choice~~ fragmentation in the ecosystem. Deb/RPM/Flatpak/Snap/PKGBUILD/Nix, GNOME/KDE/Cosmic/Cinnamon/Xfce/LXQt/MATE/Budgie/Sway/Hyprland, AppArmor/SELinux, GTK/Qt/Electron/Tauri/WxWidgets there's even distributions which use musl libc instead of GNU libc or non-systemd inits. Sure, you can just pick one and focus on it, but if someone else picks something else then they may need to duplicate some effort to get things working on their preferred setup.
When you put down your project in a sound and standards compliant way, packaging doesn't matter much. RPM and DEB automatically builds your code and packages it. DEB also has a lot of tools which allows you to make sure that everything is done correctly. I'm sure RPM has similar tools, but I didn't use them a lot.
Desktop environment doesn't matter much, because GTK and Qt works on every Linux Desktop. I'm using KDE, but I don't know which tools I use are GTK, which are Qt, etc. Qt and GTK teams collaborate a ton both in window management and desktop underpinnings side. Also there are tons of standards, and things just work if you follow them. Even the standard libraries of programming languages and Linux userland gives the tools to utilize these standards.
C libraries are mostly interoperable. I operate with GNU's C library, but aside from interesting behavioral differences, the API is not different.
If you're not writing daemons, you have no business with your init system in 99% of the cases, unless you want to utilize a special feature of any of them. You can just ship the service files. daemon() function is part of libc, not your init system.
In total, after your code builds, you can add these layers step by step, one at a time, and have a codebase which works everywhere with minimal effort.
Eroding user's rights is good if it means users have fewer choices because choice is bad? I suppose it would mean that resources could concentrate in a smaller, more focused set of software, but I really can't see how that would justify the harm caused.
Just think about how easy it would be though - imagine - one single OS, one single version always immediately up to date, one consistent set of installed software, attestation to ensure no adversaries are attempting to modify or install unsupported software, full accurate and thorough analytics, what a dream...
Yea what a Fall of Rome type dream - just look what happened when people overused a specific measure - we had Crowdstrike with around 8.5 million devices crashed to BSoD.
Identical OS, identical apps, identical updates, identical crashes at same time.
If you centralise then it is not the question "Will?" but "When?" it will fail.
The defining characteristic is that everyone is using it, not that it's your personal ideal operating system. We have a few major players trying to create their version of the one single os. They're already nobodies ideal, and they have the luxury of telling people to go elsewhere if the system isn't right for them. Imagine how much worse it would be if they had to support everything.
And there's of course the spiritual sequel, Bruetal Legend. The main campaign can be played more as an action game, but if you get into multiplayer the RTS elements really come through.
It's just written Brutal Legend if you can't type the ü. The dots you see in the name are not equivalent to an umlauted u, but instead it's just röck döts.
Since rock dots don't affect the pronunciation of the name, you wouldn't expand to add a letter (which would affect the pronunciation) if you can't type the decorative dots.
Measuring CPUs by thread count and clock speed is not a good way to gauge performance. A current gen CPU would be several times faster than this old CPU.
Depending on workload, this old CPU might be as slow as a 2 thread or even 1 thread current gen server.
It does 8000 CPU marks with 4 cores. Sure Xeon 674X does 83641 with 28 cores. But show me where can you find it for less than 10 times the price? And with 320GB RAM, 10TB of NVMe SSD storage and 10 GBit/s of "unlimited" bandwidth
More than that, compare it to modern cloud CPUs. Epyc 9845 gets 153000 but that's with 160 cores / 320 threads. Per core it's under 1000 and 4 cores would be 3825 when the 11-year-old i7 is 8000.
Because those big systems are optimized for power efficiency. That Epyc is ~2.4W/core compared to ~16W/core for the old i7. It has a lower base clock and is Zen5c. If we cut the 8-core Ryzen 9850X3D's score in half, 4 Ryzen cores from the same generation but with a higher base clock and six times the L3 cache per core would be 20942. But it's also back up to 15W/core. The Epyc still has better performance per watt.
The newer cores are significantly more efficient. That doesn't mean they're unconditionally faster independent of all other variables.
> And with 320GB RAM, 10TB of NVMe SSD storage and 10 GBit/s of "unlimited" bandwidth
I think you’re talking about something else. The comment above was about a machine that didn’t have 10TB of storage, 320GB RAM, or unlimited bandwidth.
If you find 320GB of RAM and unlimited bandwidth for 40 Euro monthly then send it over!
The 39 eur machine has 32GB of RAM ~1TB of storage and 1gbit/s. So to make it a fair comparison the 10 times faster cpu should also have 10 times of those resources
Oh my, there's a new language called Rust? Didn't they know there already is one? The old one is so popular that I can't imagine the nicely readable one to gain any traction whatsoever (even if the old one is an assault on the senses).
Make things that require you to use the parts of the language you don't have a strong grasp on yet, so as to get to know those better. Sorting algos, data structures, a kanren, and a library website would be a good variety pack. And aside from that, reading codebases is also important. Read the code of your CPAN equivalent, your Alexandria equivalent, your Spring equivalent, and your SDL equivalent.
> eMacs
I love Emacs, but I don't see how a Lisp platform with a web browser, a Tetris implementation, and 4 terminal emulators (shell, term, ansi-term, eshell) can be considered 'lightweight'.
reply