4 ms·

In no particular order: 100r.co, OpenBSD (& its many individual contributors such as tedu or JCS), Suckless/9front, sr.ht, Alpine, Gemini (&gopher) & all the pe

In no particular order: 100r.co, OpenBSD (& its many individual contributors such as tedu or JCS), Suckless/9front, sr.ht, Alpine, Gemini (&gopher) & all the people you can find there, Low Tech Magazine, antirez, Fabrice Bellard, Virgil Dupras (CollapseOS), & many other people, communities, and projects - sorry I don't have a single comprehensive list, that's just off the top of my head ;)

kragen 3y ago
i... really don't think kris de decker is on niklaus wirth's level. i don't think he can write so much as fizzbuzz fabrice bellard is wirth-level, it's true. not sure about tedu and jcs, because i'm not familiar enough with their work. it's absurd to compare most of the others to wirth and hoare you're comparing kindergarten finger paintings to da vinci you said wirth was "far from the last" apostle of simplicity. definition of apostle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle
- rollcat 3y ago
  > it's absurd to compare most of the others to wirth and hoare You're the one trying to directly compare achievement, not me. If you're looking for top achievers, I'd have to name PHP or systemd, and THAT would be out of place ;) I even said "in no particular order", because I don't think any two can be easily compared. My main criterion for inclusion was the drive for simplifying technology, and publishing these efforts: > An apostle [...], in its literal sense, is an emissary. The word is [...] literally "one who is sent off" [...]. The purpose of such sending off is usually to convey a message, and thus "messenger" is a common alternative translation. Every single project, person, or community I've named here has some form of web page, blog, RSS feed, papers/presentations, and/or source code, that serve to carry their messages. Achievement can be measured, simplicity can only be appreciated.
amatecha 3y ago
uxn ftw <3
- kragen 3y ago
  uxn is cool but it's definitely not the same kind of achievement as oberon, pascal, quicksort, forth, and structured programming; rek and devine would surely not claim it was
  - amatecha 3y ago
    to quote gp, "beautiful software is still being made today". It's not a competition.
    - kragen 3y ago
      you don't get to be described as an 'apostle of simplicity' just because you like simplicity. you have to actually change the world by creating simplicity. devine and rek are still a long way from a turing award
      - amatecha 3y ago
        you don't get to dictate who does or doesn't get recognized for creating awesome works that influence and inspire others. take your persistent negativity elsewhere. btw, uxn is absolutely the exemplification of "software built for humans to understand" and simplicity. I mean... > the resulting programs are succinct and translate well to pen & paper computing. > to make any one program available on a new platform, the emulator is the only piece of code that will need to be modified, which is explicitly designed to be easily implemented https://100r.co/site/uxn_design.html https://100r.co/site/uxn_design.html how one can frame this as trivial is beyond me.
        kragen 3y ago
        i don't think uxn is trivial, i think it's a first step toward something great. it definitely isn't the exemplification of "software built for humans to understand"; you have to program it in assembly language, and a stack-based assembly language at that. in that sense it's closer to brainfuck than to hypertalk or excel or oberon. it falls short of its goal of working well on small computers (say, under a megabyte of ram and under a mips) the bit you quote about uxn having a standard virtual machine to permit easy ports to new platforms is from wirth's 01965 paper on euler http://pascal.hansotten.com/niklaus-wirth/euler-2/ http://pascal.hansotten.com/niklaus-wirth/euler-2/; it isn't something devine and rek invented, and it may not have been something wirth invented either. schorre's 01963 paper on meta-ii targets a machine-independent 'fictitious machine' but it's not turing-complete and it's not clear if he intended it to be implemented by interpretation rather than, say, assembler macros i suggest that if you develop more tolerance for opinions that differ from your own, instead of deprecating them as 'persistent negativity' and 'dictating', you will learn more rapidly, because other people know things you don't, and sometimes that is why our opinions differ. sometimes those things we know that you don't are even correct i think this is one of those cases. what i said, that you were disagreeing with, was that uxn was not the same kind of achievement as oberon, pascal, quicksort, forth, and structured programming (and, let me clarify, a much less significant achievement) and that it is a long way from [meriting] a turing award. i don't see how anyone could possibly disagree with that, or gloss it as 'uxn is trivial', as you did, unless they don't know what those things are i am pretty sure that if you ask devine what he thinks about this comment, you will find that he agrees with every word in it
nextos 3y ago
I'd also mention https://www.piumarta.com https://www.piumarta.com
- kragen 3y ago
  ooh, yeah, now that's a possibility
johndoe0815 3y ago
I would add Jochen Liedtke (unfortunately he passed away already more than 20 years ago) as inventor of the L4 microkernel. Several research groups continued work on L4 after Liedtke's death (Hermann Härtig in Dresden, Gernot Heiser in Sydney, a bit of research at Frank Bellosa's group in Karlsruhe and more industrial research on L4 for embedded/RT systems by Robert Kaiser, later a professor in Wiesbaden), but I would still argue that Liedtke's original work was the most influential, though all the formal verification work in Sydney also had significant impact - but that was only enabled by the simplicity of the underlying microkernel concepts and implementations.
- kragen 3y ago
  agreed, though i think l4 was more influential than eumel (which is free software now by the way) even though eumel preceded l4

kragen 3y ago

i... really don't think kris de decker is on niklaus wirth's level. i don't think he can write so much as fizzbuzz fabrice bellard is wirth-level, it's true. not sure about tedu and jcs, because i'm not familiar enough with their work. it's absurd to compare most of the others to wirth and hoare you're comparing kindergarten finger paintings to da vinci you said wirth was "far from the last" apostle of simplicity. definition of apostle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle

rollcat 3y ago
> it's absurd to compare most of the others to wirth and hoare You're the one trying to directly compare achievement, not me. If you're looking for top achievers, I'd have to name PHP or systemd, and THAT would be out of place ;) I even said "in no particular order", because I don't think any two can be easily compared. My main criterion for inclusion was the drive for simplifying technology, and publishing these efforts: > An apostle [...], in its literal sense, is an emissary. The word is [...] literally "one who is sent off" [...]. The purpose of such sending off is usually to convey a message, and thus "messenger" is a common alternative translation. Every single project, person, or community I've named here has some form of web page, blog, RSS feed, papers/presentations, and/or source code, that serve to carry their messages. Achievement can be measured, simplicity can only be appreciated.

amatecha 3y ago

uxn ftw <3

kragen 3y ago
uxn is cool but it's definitely not the same kind of achievement as oberon, pascal, quicksort, forth, and structured programming; rek and devine would surely not claim it was
- amatecha 3y ago
  to quote gp, "beautiful software is still being made today". It's not a competition.
  - kragen 3y ago
    you don't get to be described as an 'apostle of simplicity' just because you like simplicity. you have to actually change the world by creating simplicity. devine and rek are still a long way from a turing award
    - amatecha 3y ago
      you don't get to dictate who does or doesn't get recognized for creating awesome works that influence and inspire others. take your persistent negativity elsewhere. btw, uxn is absolutely the exemplification of "software built for humans to understand" and simplicity. I mean... > the resulting programs are succinct and translate well to pen & paper computing. > to make any one program available on a new platform, the emulator is the only piece of code that will need to be modified, which is explicitly designed to be easily implemented https://100r.co/site/uxn_design.html https://100r.co/site/uxn_design.html how one can frame this as trivial is beyond me.
      - kragen 3y ago
        i don't think uxn is trivial, i think it's a first step toward something great. it definitely isn't the exemplification of "software built for humans to understand"; you have to program it in assembly language, and a stack-based assembly language at that. in that sense it's closer to brainfuck than to hypertalk or excel or oberon. it falls short of its goal of working well on small computers (say, under a megabyte of ram and under a mips) the bit you quote about uxn having a standard virtual machine to permit easy ports to new platforms is from wirth's 01965 paper on euler http://pascal.hansotten.com/niklaus-wirth/euler-2/ http://pascal.hansotten.com/niklaus-wirth/euler-2/; it isn't something devine and rek invented, and it may not have been something wirth invented either. schorre's 01963 paper on meta-ii targets a machine-independent 'fictitious machine' but it's not turing-complete and it's not clear if he intended it to be implemented by interpretation rather than, say, assembler macros i suggest that if you develop more tolerance for opinions that differ from your own, instead of deprecating them as 'persistent negativity' and 'dictating', you will learn more rapidly, because other people know things you don't, and sometimes that is why our opinions differ. sometimes those things we know that you don't are even correct i think this is one of those cases. what i said, that you were disagreeing with, was that uxn was not the same kind of achievement as oberon, pascal, quicksort, forth, and structured programming (and, let me clarify, a much less significant achievement) and that it is a long way from [meriting] a turing award. i don't see how anyone could possibly disagree with that, or gloss it as 'uxn is trivial', as you did, unless they don't know what those things are i am pretty sure that if you ask devine what he thinks about this comment, you will find that he agrees with every word in it

nextos 3y ago

I'd also mention https://www.piumarta.com https://www.piumarta.com

kragen 3y ago
ooh, yeah, now that's a possibility

johndoe0815 3y ago

I would add Jochen Liedtke (unfortunately he passed away already more than 20 years ago) as inventor of the L4 microkernel. Several research groups continued work on L4 after Liedtke's death (Hermann Härtig in Dresden, Gernot Heiser in Sydney, a bit of research at Frank Bellosa's group in Karlsruhe and more industrial research on L4 for embedded/RT systems by Robert Kaiser, later a professor in Wiesbaden), but I would still argue that Liedtke's original work was the most influential, though all the formal verification work in Sydney also had significant impact - but that was only enabled by the simplicity of the underlying microkernel concepts and implementations.

kragen 3y ago
agreed, though i think l4 was more influential than eumel (which is free software now by the way) even though eumel preceded l4