5 ms·

We don't have the value of the supercomputer, because our supercomputers don't ship with compilers onboard. Removing compilers - and indeed, software tools in

We don't have the value of the supercomputer, because our supercomputers don't ship with compilers onboard. Removing compilers - and indeed, software tools in general - from the requirements for a base operating system is the reason we have these disproportionate power cycles in our computing world. The compiler is the single most important application an Operating System can run - yet it is is denied first-class membership in the system image these days. Alas, this circumstance came about in order to create an artificial scarcity of people who can make computers do things. If the compiler is onboard - anyone can learn to use it and then use it, and they don't "need developers". Removing the most powerful tool in an Operating System in order to create this condition, has crippled forward progress. If this ever changes, I expect to be seeing a lot better software out there. But as it stands right now, developers of platforms don't want broadly-accessible and easy to use developer tools to be available to all and sundry. This omission is really just a class battle in disguise. Bring back the compiler as a first-class tool!

pg314 11y ago
While I do agree that having a compiler accessible on a platform is a positive, I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim that anyone can learn to use it and then use it. It glosses over the enormous learning curve to develop software with the current mainstream tools (especially the ones that need compilers). If you look at e.g. Mac OS X, where the compiler can be downloaded and installed by anyone, very few do and even fewer develop software. Our current systems are simply not designed to be extended and modified by non-experts. Even in a system like Smalltalk, where that was one of the explicit goals, it doesn't really seem to have worked out. Having the compiler and software tools accessible is only small part of the solution.
- fit2rule 11y ago
  >Our current systems are simply not designed to be extended and modified by non-experts. Yes, that is exactly the point - and it is by design, not nature. >anyone can learn to use it and then use it Well, this has been the case so far - or were those of us fortunate enough to have become software developers only able to attain such lofty states by chance, luck and/or good breeding? Because if that is your position: bollocks. Anyone can learn to read, and write, computer code. All it takes is the intention on the part of the learner to do so .. however when that option is denied them, because OS vendors do everything they can to profit from separated Developer tools, then it is a matter of one intention being greater than the other. Certainly, anyone who wants to learn to write software, can. But don't kid yourself that there haven't been huge stumbling blocks put in their way in order to make the whole subject more specialized. That is a matter of economic reality at this point.
  - pg314 11y ago
    >Anyone can learn to read, and write, computer code I agree that most motivated learners could pick up some very basic software skills, and those would be beneficial to them. In a utopian world basic programming skills would be treated the same as basic literacy and numeracy. However, at this point in time, it seems to me that most users don't care (maybe because they don't know what they're missing). As an analogy, most people could learn basic knife skills in a couple of hours and be much more productive in the kitchen with a chef's knife than they are now with the huge array of inferior point tools (cheap dull knives, garlic slicer, chopper, egg slicer, etc.). However there is obviously a big market for the latter. Similarly, I'm not sure extensible and modifiable systems have enough attraction to the average user. Another reason for closed systems, one which I think is more important than the profit motive, is that designing extensible and modifiable systems is really hard and comes with trade-offs. E.g. Squeak (a Smalltalk dialect) allows you to inspect and modify almost everything in the system while it runs, but that also means that is really easy to screw up the system behind repair (e.g. you can switch every boolean in the running system by evaluating 'true become: false') and that supporting users of such systems becomes much harder. I am not aware of any system that has a solution to this.
icebraining 11y ago
Actually, all platforms have a compiler: a jit JavaScript compiler, ready to run whatever code you want by just typing it in a text file and opening it with your browser. (Incidentally, it's how I started back in 2000, on public computers). There are also plenty of WebIDEs nowadays that people can use out of the box - we are not in the 90s anymore, when all software had to be "installed" to be readily available.
- duaneb 11y ago
  Yes, and you can't access the vast majority of services the phone offers without a hell of a lot of latency. If you can at all. JS is a joke compared to the capabilities of a c compiler.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    If you're advanced enough you feel the need for more, you can get the compiler then - they're still available, just not bundled. JS is more than enough to learn programming and write some useful apps.
    - duaneb 11y ago
      > If you're advanced enough you feel the need for more, you can get the compiler then - they're still available, just not bundled. I don't believe you can acquire a C compiler for the iPad without buying an actual computer. At which point, why get the iPad again? With just JS, it's a toy. A powerful toy, yes, but it's a small subset of what's possible with a computer, and one that leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.
      - icebraining 11y ago
        I agree, the iPad is a joke. But we were talking about mobile generally, and you can get a C compiler for Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n0n3m4.droidc https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n0n3m4.dro... You can even run Debian -with plenty of its software, like Apache, Nginx and MySQL- on (some) Android devices.
omouse 11y ago
You're correct and this may be why we see all of these people who say "I have a great app/website idea!" and then do nothing or look for developers to implement their idea. If the barrier to entry is lower there would be more people trying to implement their idea. It's not enough to have a compiler, we need a simpler scripting language as well so anyone can create throwaway web apps. We need a Tcl or Perl for Android and iOS.
- s73v3r 11y ago
  No, we see that because those people want to be rich, but not actually have to work. Seriously, the barrier to entry is stupid low, and yet they're not clammoring to implement their own idea. Why?
- fit2rule 11y ago
  These tools are out there. We need to make it unacceptable that they are not included. The only way to do that is innovate on the open-source/free- operating system front. For as long as "major producers" set the standards, we will be in their traps.
- blacksqr 11y ago
  Tcl/Tk for Android exists and works great. http://www.androwish.org http://www.androwish.org

pg314 11y ago

While I do agree that having a compiler accessible on a platform is a positive, I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim that anyone can learn to use it and then use it. It glosses over the enormous learning curve to develop software with the current mainstream tools (especially the ones that need compilers). If you look at e.g. Mac OS X, where the compiler can be downloaded and installed by anyone, very few do and even fewer develop software. Our current systems are simply not designed to be extended and modified by non-experts. Even in a system like Smalltalk, where that was one of the explicit goals, it doesn't really seem to have worked out. Having the compiler and software tools accessible is only small part of the solution.

fit2rule 11y ago
>Our current systems are simply not designed to be extended and modified by non-experts. Yes, that is exactly the point - and it is by design, not nature. >anyone can learn to use it and then use it Well, this has been the case so far - or were those of us fortunate enough to have become software developers only able to attain such lofty states by chance, luck and/or good breeding? Because if that is your position: bollocks. Anyone can learn to read, and write, computer code. All it takes is the intention on the part of the learner to do so .. however when that option is denied them, because OS vendors do everything they can to profit from separated Developer tools, then it is a matter of one intention being greater than the other. Certainly, anyone who wants to learn to write software, can. But don't kid yourself that there haven't been huge stumbling blocks put in their way in order to make the whole subject more specialized. That is a matter of economic reality at this point.
- pg314 11y ago
  >Anyone can learn to read, and write, computer code I agree that most motivated learners could pick up some very basic software skills, and those would be beneficial to them. In a utopian world basic programming skills would be treated the same as basic literacy and numeracy. However, at this point in time, it seems to me that most users don't care (maybe because they don't know what they're missing). As an analogy, most people could learn basic knife skills in a couple of hours and be much more productive in the kitchen with a chef's knife than they are now with the huge array of inferior point tools (cheap dull knives, garlic slicer, chopper, egg slicer, etc.). However there is obviously a big market for the latter. Similarly, I'm not sure extensible and modifiable systems have enough attraction to the average user. Another reason for closed systems, one which I think is more important than the profit motive, is that designing extensible and modifiable systems is really hard and comes with trade-offs. E.g. Squeak (a Smalltalk dialect) allows you to inspect and modify almost everything in the system while it runs, but that also means that is really easy to screw up the system behind repair (e.g. you can switch every boolean in the running system by evaluating 'true become: false') and that supporting users of such systems becomes much harder. I am not aware of any system that has a solution to this.

icebraining 11y ago

Actually, all platforms have a compiler: a jit JavaScript compiler, ready to run whatever code you want by just typing it in a text file and opening it with your browser. (Incidentally, it's how I started back in 2000, on public computers). There are also plenty of WebIDEs nowadays that people can use out of the box - we are not in the 90s anymore, when all software had to be "installed" to be readily available.

duaneb 11y ago
Yes, and you can't access the vast majority of services the phone offers without a hell of a lot of latency. If you can at all. JS is a joke compared to the capabilities of a c compiler.
- icebraining 11y ago
  If you're advanced enough you feel the need for more, you can get the compiler then - they're still available, just not bundled. JS is more than enough to learn programming and write some useful apps.
  - duaneb 11y ago
    > If you're advanced enough you feel the need for more, you can get the compiler then - they're still available, just not bundled. I don't believe you can acquire a C compiler for the iPad without buying an actual computer. At which point, why get the iPad again? With just JS, it's a toy. A powerful toy, yes, but it's a small subset of what's possible with a computer, and one that leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      I agree, the iPad is a joke. But we were talking about mobile generally, and you can get a C compiler for Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n0n3m4.droidc https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.n0n3m4.dro... You can even run Debian -with plenty of its software, like Apache, Nginx and MySQL- on (some) Android devices.

omouse 11y ago

You're correct and this may be why we see all of these people who say "I have a great app/website idea!" and then do nothing or look for developers to implement their idea. If the barrier to entry is lower there would be more people trying to implement their idea. It's not enough to have a compiler, we need a simpler scripting language as well so anyone can create throwaway web apps. We need a Tcl or Perl for Android and iOS.

s73v3r 11y ago
No, we see that because those people want to be rich, but not actually have to work. Seriously, the barrier to entry is stupid low, and yet they're not clammoring to implement their own idea. Why?
fit2rule 11y ago
These tools are out there. We need to make it unacceptable that they are not included. The only way to do that is innovate on the open-source/free- operating system front. For as long as "major producers" set the standards, we will be in their traps.
blacksqr 11y ago
Tcl/Tk for Android exists and works great. http://www.androwish.org http://www.androwish.org