pecg

If you are really attached to such idea and would love to work on it, your best bet is to reimplement it on your own, with a new code base. That is if you didn't sign a NDA.

I can't understand the reasoning on putting everything behind HTTP these days. Personally, I think that if a project decides to go that route it's because poor design decisions. Separation of interests should exist in software solutions.

This program looks interesting. Maybe it could help in the bootstrap process of tcc, though I don't know if it is written in ANSI C. On a related note, I will try to test compiling lua's runtime environment and interpreter, because I'm sure it is written using standard C already.

I'm glad I made the switch from Arch to Void. Runit is clean and simple, it does the correct job in a deterministic fashion, if something fails proper errors appear on usual logs.

It sounds as if the problem was systemd instead of 'emacs --dameon'.

> The other knock on ada was it was slow.

I'm curious, is the compilation time that takes too much, or is it the execution time? I'm really interested in learning the language, but I don't want to end-up with programs that generate slower native code, compared to that of C. What's your experience with it?

Thank you for this explanation, it gives me a better idea about Emacs' design.

Before Void I tried Alpine briefly, but couldn't resolve an issue with MESA, back then I didn't had the adecuate knowledge to fix it myself.

Before I migrated to Void, I used slackware-current extensively, it is indeed the cleanest GNU/Linux distribution I've found. Personally, I loved manually dependency resolution, but sadly didn't had the time to do it, so I ended up with Void, and it really shines on staying out of my way.

I know that from a technical point of view, Emacs is not just a text editor; I think it is a complete lisp virtual machine with a text-based interface that happens to be prepared for editing text by default, and thus it should be treated as such, instead of running it over as a userland program maybe one day it works as a standalone operating system, with its own kernel and JIT compiled lisp dialect. I'm saying this, because when I first started using Unix-like operating systems Emacs was one of the things that attracted me the most, but after actively using it for almost a year I saw how it moved away from the expected operation mode of a typical Unix environment, and I didn't like that. I came to appreciate the phylosophy of "One program to do one thing and do it well... make programs that work together", I consider it an elegant way to design and implement software, thus I don't see where Emacs fits on a Unix-like system. In the end, I ditched it in favor of something much more simple, fast and adecuate, this is where vis does an outstanding job, having the unique plus of using a structural regular expressions engine, and extensible using Lua. vis is small (source code and binary) and I don't have to think about what SSL implementation it should use, because there is a system library that does it for me, since vis is just a text editor, and succeeds at it.

I would like to include Void as a serious, competent and elegant distribution. I've used it for a complete year, and have really come to appreciate its focus on simplicity, reminds how Arch was before they decided to use systemd.

Like the OpenBSD developers, a posture much needed these days.

I share the same fascination you have. I'm always interested in how our brains collectively developed ways to communicate through spoken languages, it makes wonder how things will change a thousand years from now. I'm sure some developing patterns could arise.

And the same kind of practices where done in El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Colombia, Bolivia, Perú, Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, to name a few.

FreeBSD's kernel offers better performance (on the server) compared to Linux, and the licensing model makes it more attractive to some industries. Whatsapp (server side), Netflix, and the internals of PS3/4 all use FreeBSD code. OpenBSD is actively used in networks, as a firewall (where iptables from Linux is a mess) and other security oriented aspects where stability is also crucial. Linux is popular because it became available to users first than the others back in the 90s, OpenBSD's contributors, on the contrary, are comfortable on not implementing overengineered "features" with the sole purpose on keeping the source clean, stable, and with as less bugs as possible, as a UNIX system should be.