TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.)
-
@PleegWat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@asdf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
And that doesn't matter while discussing the usefulness of the CLI.
Did anyone in this thread argue that a CLI is completely useless?
Yes
But blakeyrat left! Did he leave an alt or something?
We are all boomzilla, and he is blakeyrat, QED, we are all blakeyrat.
-
@abarker Is this one of those proofs where the result is "1 = 0" and we have to find out where you sneakily violated some axiom?
-
@asdf Maybe β¦
-
@abarker Hm⦠Did we already prove that "being an alt" is an equivalence relation? That must be your incorrect assumption!
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@asdf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
That doesn't mean video chat programs are as easy to make as text chat programs.
Shoulder aliens at 7:40 in the morning? Bloody hell!
I didn't say anything like that, I just debunked @fbmac's argument for text interfaces.
Any argument that states GUIs are easier to make than text-based interfaces is incorrect because GUIs contain text and other things, whereas text-based interfaces only contain text.
..
and other things
Not necessarily!
Granted, of course there was text, but t's entirely possible to have a GUI with no text.
-
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@asdf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
That doesn't mean video chat programs are as easy to make as text chat programs.
Shoulder aliens at 7:40 in the morning? Bloody hell!
I didn't say anything like that, I just debunked @fbmac's argument for text interfaces.
Any argument that states GUIs are easier to make than text-based interfaces is incorrect because GUIs contain text and other things, whereas text-based interfaces only contain text.
..
and other things
Not necessarily!
Granted, of course there was text, but t's entirely possible to have a GUI with no text.
I'm pretty sure you can't make a GUI without text on a phone due to that top part.
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@asdf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
That doesn't mean video chat programs are as easy to make as text chat programs.
Shoulder aliens at 7:40 in the morning? Bloody hell!
I didn't say anything like that, I just debunked @fbmac's argument for text interfaces.
Any argument that states GUIs are easier to make than text-based interfaces is incorrect because GUIs contain text and other things, whereas text-based interfaces only contain text.
..
and other things
Not necessarily!
Granted, of course there was text, but t's entirely possible to have a GUI with no text.
I'm pretty sure you can't make a GUI without text on a phone due to that top part.
If was an OS manufacturer, who's stopping me?
But that's not what we're talking about, are we?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@asdf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
That doesn't mean video chat programs are as easy to make as text chat programs.
Shoulder aliens at 7:40 in the morning? Bloody hell!
I didn't say anything like that, I just debunked @fbmac's argument for text interfaces.
Any argument that states GUIs are easier to make than text-based interfaces is incorrect because GUIs contain text and other things, whereas text-based interfaces only contain text.
..
and other things
Not necessarily!
Granted, of course there was text, but t's entirely possible to have a GUI with no text.
I'm pretty sure you can't make a GUI without text on a phone due to that top part.
If was an OS manufacturer, who's stopping me?
But that's not what we're talking about, are we?
Also, according to the Unicode Consortium, both of your images have a lot of text in them.
-
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
both X over SSH and VNC suck donkey balls
The main problem with X is that complicated drawing (pretty much anything with an alpha component) tends to end up needing a lot of server/client traffic. It's not too big a problem if you've got vast amounts of bandwidth and low latency, but it's still no great.
VNC just sucks. It's better than nothing, but only barely.
-
@dkf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
both X over SSH and VNC suck donkey balls
The main problem with X is that complicated drawing (pretty much anything with an alpha component) tends to end up needing a lot of server/client traffic. It's not too big a problem if you've got vast amounts of bandwidth and low latency, but it's still no great.
VNC just sucks. It's better than nothing, but only barely.
If you think you have a reason to use VNC, you're wrong and you should use a better technology.
Unless your reason is "software historian". That's the only valid reason I can think of.
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
you should use a better technology.
Like RDP?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
you should use a better technology.
Like RDP?
Sure, use RDP. At least it requires some form of authentication by default.
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
you should use a better technology.
Like RDP?
Sure, use RDP. At least it requires some form of authentication by default.
Nope, in the XP-era it was totally possible to get a working connection (admittedly just to the logon screen) without authentication. Yes, it's deprecated now, and
MSTSCRemote Desktop Connection will yell at you for it, but it still definitely works! ;)
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
you should use a better technology.
Like RDP?
Sure, use RDP. At least it requires some form of authentication by default.
Nope, in the XP-era it was totally possible to get a working connection (admittedly just to the logon screen) without authentication. Yes, it's deprecated now, and
MSTSCRemote Desktop Connection will yell at you for it, but it still definitely works! ;)
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
you should use a better technology.
Like RDP?
Sure, use RDP. At least it requires some form of authentication by default.
Nope, in the XP-era it was totally possible to get a working connection (admittedly just to the logon screen) without authentication. Yes, it's deprecated now, and
MSTSCRemote Desktop Connection will yell at you for it, but it still definitely works! ;)Ah, but (as some would say) then you'd have Chrome on you...
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
then you'd have Chrome on you
It's not so bad...
Posted from my Dhromebook Daisy.
-
@Tsaukpaetra
If that's you with Chrome on you I would say you have bigger problems then remote connecting to other pc's ... like the fact that you seem to be an eunuch
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@dkf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
both X over SSH and VNC suck donkey balls
The main problem with X is that complicated drawing (pretty much anything with an alpha component) tends to end up needing a lot of server/client traffic. It's not too big a problem if you've got vast amounts of bandwidth and low latency, but it's still no great.
VNC just sucks. It's better than nothing, but only barely.
If you think you have a reason to use VNC, you're wrong and you should use a better technology.
Unless your reason is "software historian". That's the only valid reason I can think of.
Like what, if you're on Linux?
-
@Luhmann said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
like the fact that you seem to be an eunuch
Why DO YOU THINK I HAVE TO IMPLEMENT MY OWN
ENGINE?!?!?!Erm, I mean, Shirley that picture doesn't represent me whatsoever, what brought you to that conclusion?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
what brought you to that conclusion?
shits and giggles
-
@Luhmann said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
what brought you to that conclusion?
shits and giggles
Well, I mean, you do you, but I may not be able to give you a shit, so sorry, those giggles will need to come elsewhere....
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
those giggles will need to come elsewhere
then I'll have to tickle myself
-
@Luhmann said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
those giggles will need to come elsewhere
then I'll have to tickle myself
The masturbation thread is
?
-
@Tsaukpaetra
Uh? Isn't that everywhere?
-
@Luhmann said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@Tsaukpaetra
Uh? Isn't that everywhere?Is that not what the
means?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
Why DO YOU THINK I HAVE TO IMPLEMENT MY OWN
ENGINE?!?!?!NIH syndrome. Is that better or worse than left-pad syndrome?
-
@boomzilla said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
NIH
Hey! I recently learned what that means!
As for better or worse.... It's not like I can just install someone else's brain, right? Have we had a topic on that yet?
-
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@dkf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
both X over SSH and VNC suck donkey balls
The main problem with X is that complicated drawing (pretty much anything with an alpha component) tends to end up needing a lot of server/client traffic. It's not too big a problem if you've got vast amounts of bandwidth and low latency, but it's still no great.
VNC just sucks. It's better than nothing, but only barely.
If you think you have a reason to use VNC, you're wrong and you should use a better technology.
Unless your reason is "software historian". That's the only valid reason I can think of.
Like what, if you're on Linux?
I use Chrome Remote Desktop on a headless Linux machine.
-
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@ben_lubar said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@dkf said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
@fbmac said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
both X over SSH and VNC suck donkey balls
The main problem with X is that complicated drawing (pretty much anything with an alpha component) tends to end up needing a lot of server/client traffic. It's not too big a problem if you've got vast amounts of bandwidth and low latency, but it's still no great.
VNC just sucks. It's better than nothing, but only barely.
If you think you have a reason to use VNC, you're wrong and you should use a better technology.
Unless your reason is "software historian". That's the only valid reason I can think of.
Like what, if you're on Linux?
I use Chrome Remote Desktop on a headless Linux machine.
That is closed source, you're sacrificing freedom for a small convenience
-
@wharrgarbl Welcome back!
-
I checked the app store of Temple OS, and saw a pretty nice sample code.
TempleShell/TempleShell.HC at master Β· shawnanastasio/TempleShell
A Unix-like shell for TempleOS written in HolyC. Contribute to shawnanastasio/TempleShell development by creating an account on GitHub.
It is pretty nice, you live in C. Include things around and then go back to shell with
TempleShell;It is not that far from living in Basic on a Commodore :--)
@anonymous234 said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
But if you just pick a simple one and stick with it, there won't be any problems.
If only I had a frame buffer to poke fun at
SCREEN 12
-
https://twitter.com/Cthulhu20234/status/1035682925956788224
The author died. According to Wikipedia, a "hiking accident."
I guess God wasn't pleased? Or needed an upgrade.
-
@cartman82 said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
I guess God wasn't pleased? Or needed an upgrade.
God
MAllocs and GodFrees.
-
@JBert Except when He chooses to
Reallocβ¦
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
So he can't get Windows working and he loves C.
Basically, I'd rather have insane schizophrenic guy tell me about OSes than this idiot reviewer. "God told me to make it 640x480" makes more sense than this article.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
Continuing the discussion from π Quick links thread:
##A Constructive Look at TempleOS
Guy goes through templeOS and points out the good / interesting things.
Ok this deserves a topic.
Booting Windows this morning, I canβt help but notice how long it takes. And even when Windows βappearsβ to have booted, it doesnβt actually become properly usable for perhaps another minute. If you listen, you can spot the point at which usability is declared because Windows plays the startup sound to indicate it.
How is this possible?
How is a guy who's Windows isn't usable on a 2015 computer (and note this article is recent) for "perhaps another minute" qualified to talk to us about an OS? He can't even get the most popular OS in the world running WITHIN AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE of its normal performance!!! 8-year-olds have computers working better than his.
It raises an interesting challenge for other OSs β why do shells have to be pure text? Why canβt we have a multimedia shell?
Or code files for that matter. It always annoys me that I can't just put the flowchart of the function I'm working on there in the code file right next to the function. Fucking Microsoft Word has been able to do that since 1992, and Visual Studio can't in 2015?
(Of course we all know the answer: the kind of people who build programming tools live in 1982 and are suspicious of anything that didn't exist in 1982 and refuse to adopt it.)
You donβt need to run a rebuild process, just compile the file and the documentation updates.
You don't need to rebuild, just rebuild! ... oh wait.
Given a class, you can enumerate every member to get its name, offset, etc. Whatβs surprising is that you can also attach any custom metadata to any class member at compile time. Example uses for this might include storing its default value, min/max range, printf format string. Does your language support this?
No; it sounds like an extremely bad idea.
That all said, I agree with a lot of the points in the article, some of the stuff in TempleOS is actually really slick.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
Why do you need a flowchart in your code and not in some other file in the same folder?
Convenience.
Does the compiler understand your flowchart?
C# allows a lot of shit in code files that the compiler doesn't understand and, in fact, strips out instantly. They're called "comments". You may have heard of them.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
but my Windows computer usually takes about 5 minutes to start up.
What did you do to it?
My dad's Windows laptop takes about 10 minutes to get to the desktop followed by 5 minutes of various "open on startup" programs popping up, and during that time anything you try to do gets queued for after the "open at startup" programs are all running.
Why doesn't he fix it?
What the fuck is wrong with you people?
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
It's sort of like hibernation, I think.
Well if you ever figure out what the fuck you're talking about, let me know.
No wait.
I meant to say, "never talk to me ever again." Dunno how I typoed that.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
Parsing comments out of a text file and parsing image data out of a no-long-a-text-file are probably not quite the same thing.
There's no law that says the images have to be in the same file. The file could have a comment marker saying "insert image X at line Y" that the IDE doesn't show, and the image could be a separate file.
Engage your brain for about 48 nanoseconds and think of how this feature could work. Or is your brain to ossified for any new ideas or creativity to exist in it?
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
It's not my job. I wouldn't even derive much value from it, since there's no way the 1982 knee-jerkers I work with would make it a standard part of the company Visual Studio configuration, so I'd only have access to it on my hobby projects where, by and large, I'm not coding from flowcharts.
It doesn't change the fact that it's a giant WTF that this doesn't exist.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
Some people don't boot off SSDs, you know (and by "some people" I mean "probably the large majority of users, but I couldn't find any actual stats"). It's probably safe to assume he isn't.
Ok? He's still an order of magnitude off.
Time until logon dialog: 25 seconds
Lie!
Time until the desktop is presented and the logon sound plays: 33 seconds
Mega lie!
Time until all paging has finished and I can actually load things: 63 seconds
M-m-m-m-MONSTER LIE!
Unless you're claiming that the normal performance of Win7 on spinning metal is <12s to complete usability (and if you are, that's TRWTF),
Actually yes I am. That's about the performance my Windows 7 computer was getting before I added an SSD.
I think he disabled that fast startup feature Boomzilla mentioned. Because he's a dumbshit. And I think he then, after sabotaging the OS, decided to complain about its performance without bothering to mention the only reason it performs that badly is because he sabotaged it.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
But Windows definitely takes a lot longer to get to a useful system under that configuration.
Under the sabotaged configuration? WHAT A SHOCKER.
It's almost as if after breaking something, it's broken. Huh!
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
I'm not talking about it taking longer than itself in the other configuration, but than a different OS on the same machine.
Yeah because when you installed the other OS, you disabled the Windows feature that makes it boot fast. A.k.a. sabotage.
WHY ARE WE REPEATING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN!? PLEASE DIE.
-
@blakeyrat said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
It's obviously my fault that the crazy nut reorganized his website in the last 8 months. I'll go commit ritual seppuku now.
-
I really should write a script for this.
-
@pie_flavor
WE GET IT ALREADY!
-
@pie_flavor said in TempleOS and HolyC (Again. I think there's already a thread. Oh well.):
I really should write a script for this.
Will you stop doing that, script or no script?
-
Do you think CIA finally got him?
