blippage

A huge thank-you to the dev(s)! I love retro projects like this. I use Dillo daily, although it is for internal use. One thing I use it for is to view gemini protocol sites. The plug-in architecture means that you can render any protocol; gopher and gemini amongst others.

It's so lightweight!

Finance professor Aswath Damodaran, and others, have made many useful insights as to how AI as an investment is likely to pay out.

One technique is, instead of trying to pick individual winners, look at the total addressable market. Then compare the market size with the capital being pumped in. If you look on this basis, Aswath concluded that collectively AI investment is likely to provide unsatisfactory returns.

Here's a recent headline: "Nvidia’s Jensen Huang thinks $1 trillion won’t be enough to meet AI demand—and he’s paying engineers in AI tokens worth half their salary to prove it"

There are two parts to this. 1. A staggering $1t is expected to be invested in AI. Someone worked out that this was more than the entire capital expenditure for companies like Apple. We're talking about its entire existence here. IOW, $1t is a lot of dough. A LOT.

Secondly, this whole notion that AI is such a sure thing that half the salary will be in tokens should ring alarm bells. '“I could totally imagine in the future every single engineer in our company will need an annual token budget,” he said. “They’re going to make a few 100,000 a year as their base pay. I’m going to give them probably half of that on top of it as tokens so that they could be amplified 10 times.”'

I recall from the dotcom fiasco that service companies like accountants and lawyers were providing services to the dotcom companies and being compensated in stock options rather than cold hard cash like you'd normally expect.

Very dangerous.

As another poster pointed out, this really boils down to FOMO by big tech. I'm expecting big trouble down the line. We await to see if I'm early or just plain wrong.

> Forth is at this point more of a culture than a language.

As the saying goes, once you've seen one Forth, then you've seen one Forth.

I've mucked around with my own Forths in the past, including one that recognises lexical type, so you could build something like a parser in Forth. I didn't take it that far. Forth is normally conceived as being built from the ground up, but if you're you're going to implement it in C or C++ then you can be more imaginative.

I played around with colorforth for 5 minutes on a couple of occasions, but I ran away screaming. What - just what - the hell is going on? I'm sure it all works for Charles Moore, but for mere mortals it might as well be a klingon control panel.

I think Moore effectively gave up on programming a couple of years ago? There was some strange modification in the guts of Windows and he couldn't get his environment to work any longer. He concluded that the game was not work the candle.

To add to the cool things you can do with Neoleo, I wrote a little TCL extension that loads current processes into the spreadsheet. I added custom bindings so that you could search for processes, go to its parent, and kill processes.

I'm also half-way to adding a little calendar extension, too.

Yes, I'm partial to a bit of retro. It does back to around 1991, IIRC. I don't think it had a curses interface in those days.

And check this: version 1.2.2 is available on Aminet, for the Amiga. How's that for a blast from the past?

Oleo is C, circa 50k of C code, Neo(-leo) is around 5k of C++ code. A 10th of the size, but not necessarily any less powerful. Oleo has some memory leaks in places, whereas Neo has no (known) leaks.

Oleo uses lex and yacc, whereas Neo has a hand-parser.

Oleo is in the style of emacs bindings, whereas Neo is more vim-like, but without the modality.

I think the Neo code is better-structured and more readable (but I would say that, wouldn't I? - although it is far from perfect). C++ generally makes code more readable and obvious, without all that pointer arithmetic.

The internals of Oleo are more complicated. It uses byte-code for cells, for example. Neo stores a parse tree for a cell. So you can see that a lot of programming effort is saved right there.

In terms of speed, I suspect that the original Oleo is faster, although it's difficult to benchmark.

Neo is also heading towards being a library that you can compile in with other C++ code. Plus there's an interface to Tcl, which Oleo never had. So you get a lot of extensibility there which Oleo doesn't have.

I also think Neo is more generally accessible. It's got something in the way of a menu (still early stages), which helps. Neo is just generally less fiddly with editing cells, IMO. The mouse works, too.

Oleo does have an interface using Motif. Very early-90s. There's even an interface to GTk, although I don't think that works properly. I decided to abandon all that and just stick to an ncurses interface. After all, if you want a fancy interface, there are proper options these days like LibreCalc, Caliigra and Gnumeric.

You can have anything you want. You get what you design for.

However, saying you're committed is not the same as being committed.

Furrowing your brow and saying you'll try harder, even when you mean it, doesn't necessarily work, either.

It needs trade-offs, and a willingness for abandon certain things as trade-offs. It requires an honest assessment.

Stop updating the system every 5 minutes, stop with the advertising, stop with the user is the product mentality. Stop changing the interface. Stop with requiring a user account. Stop with the all your data are belong to us. Simplify.

None of this will happen, of course. Corporate imperatives militate against it.

Wanna improve Windows? How about having a two-year release cadence? Developers can get a technology preview, full of cavaet emptor achey breaky changes if they want. This allows them to develop for the next release.

Sync the development tools (more importantly the libraries) like C++ in with the release. Include those libraries. The pay-off is, as if by magic, if a user downloads a program for Windows N, it will work. No extra libraries will be required because they'll already be included in the OS.

In the words of Adam Ant: it took us 3 years to be famous overnight.

I also heard about Matt Lucas, of Little Britain fame. He was slowly plugging away at it, and was about to give up. At around 30 years old, he teamed up with David Walliams, describing it as the last roll of the die. Their popularity exploded.

Morgan Freeman didn't become famous until he was in his 50's. Someone asked him if he was upset that it took so long. His response was: "No, because it didn't have to happen at all."

How about trying to run it on ReactOS?

I tried Zig some time ago to use with microcontrollers. It has a generator for the pins, which was nice. But subsequent versions broke as Zig changed syntax. So I started going down the rabbit-hole (it needed a newer version of llvm, for example) until I eventually decided that the game wasn't worth the candle.

The fact that another breaking change has been introduced confirms my suspicion that Zig is not ready for primetime.

My conclusion is to just use C. For low-level programming it's very hard to improve on C. There is not likely to be any killer feature that some other contender will allow you to write the same code in a fifth of the lines nor make the code any more understandable.

Yes, C may have its quirky behaviour that people gnash their teeth over. But ultimately, it's not that bad.

If you want to use a better C, use C++. C++ is perfectly fine for using with microcontrollers, for example. Now get back to work!