ofubd8kc

5 ms·

1.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
> What you are showing is not a purebred stack machine I see where you are coming from now, and yes, you are correct these stack CPUs are not pure . The whole point though of trying to do a stack machine CPU (however impure) is to simpl
2.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
From the programmer's perspective C is not a stack based language the way that, say, Forth is, because (as you note) there are no explicit push and pop instructions. But from an implementor's perspective, evaluating C function
3.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
A stack-based WASM CPU for stack-based WASM bytecode will be slower than a traditional register based CPU for reasons that have been known at least since the 1970s-1980s, when stack-based CPUs for Smalltalk, Lisp, and C were tried. This did
4.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
> The lines of code relevant to only the init are in src/core, so your comparison would probably only make sense if you compared that folder $ wc `find src/core $ -name \*.c -o -name \*.h $ -print` [...] 81604 24
5.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
Until formal verification becomes common, something the size of systemd is always going to have security bugs that intelligence agencies will know about before the rest of us. If you don't want North Koreans hacking your server you wou
6.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
Why does systemd need an optional network manager? Will this optional network manager become non-optional in the future?
7.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
I compared systemd vs. OpenRC code size in another post, but here is Musl vs glibc code size: $ git clone git://git.musl-libc.org/musl; cd musl $ wc `find . $ -name \*.c -o -name \*.h $ -print` [...] 7
8.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
For many of us, our biggest beef with systemd is that it has no planned limitations to its scope. (This has already been discussed to death so I will try to be brief.) Let's look at the actual current code size. I just cloned the syste
9.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
Just about my favorite thing about using Ubuntu on Windows via WSL is that it does not use systemd: it uses a minimalist systemd shim instead that implements enough of systemd's interfaces to keep other essential dependencies working.
10.
by ofubd8kc 5y ago
The classic Win 95 bottom left Start button location has the advantage of being an 'infinite mouse target': rapidly flicking the mouse down-left always gets you there instantly because you can't overshoot the target, nor can