3 ms·
> Is there a catch? I am only speaking for myself here. While cosmo and ape do seem very clever, I do not need this type of clever stuff in my work if the ordi
by blenderob 2y ago
> Is there a catch?
I am only speaking for myself here. While cosmo and ape do seem very clever, I do not need this type of clever stuff in my work if the ordinary stuff already works fine.
Like for example if I can already cross-compile my project to other OSes and platforms or if I've got the infra to build my project for other OSes and platforms, I've no reason to look for a solution that lets me build one binary that works everywhere.
There's also the thing that ape uses clever hacks to be able to run on multiple OSes. What if those hacks break someday due to how executable formats evolve? What if nobody has the time to patch APE to make it compatible with those changes?
But my boring tools like gcc, clang, go, rust, etc. will continue to get updated and they will continue to work with evolving OSes. So I just tend to stick with the boring. That's why I don't bother with the clever because the boring just works for me.
- sublimefire 2y agoIf the executable format changes then it would affect more than just ape/cosmopolitan. All of the old binaries would just stop working.
- blenderob 2y agoI am not worried about the scenario where the executable format changes breaks old binaries. That is never going to happen. No OS worth its name is going to do that. I am worried about the scenario where the executable format changes just enough to break APE binaries. Like I said, APE uses very clever hacks to make itself work on multiple OSes. It is conceivable that executable formats change just enough that it breaks the clever hacks in APE binaries without breaking old ordinary binaries.