Re: Nobody wants to train anymore
A tzompantli actually as any fule no ;p
350 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Feb 2013
General aggro, legal action (if an employee thinks they have been illegally targetted, the role isn't really eliminated etc - not everywhere is America, you know), union action (ditto), or in extreme cases the aggrieved employee coming in with a fire axe.
Calling out the transition to glibc seems a bit much, given that the Windows world was transitioning from Win16 to Win32 not long before; a rather more drastic change!
(And the later (at consumer level at least) transition from Win95-derived OSes to Windows NT, for that matter, had its own pain points)
Define 'direct descendant'. Linux was written from scratch (despite what SCO were trying to say back in the day), it has no UNIX code in it. The BSDs originally did, albeit at long remove from this code, though removing anything AT&T copyrighted was part of the process of creating the ancestor to FreeBSD etc (despite what AT&T were trying to say back in the day).
Hmm well I do assembly language programming on a hobby basis because my hobby is my own compiler (well it actually generates straight machine code, to be fair). Writing assembly is a fairly niche thing even with small microcontrollers these days given you can program a Cortex-M purely in C.
To be fair, Microsoft/Intel in the mid 1990s were targetting at best low-end servers. They didn't need 64 bit addressing yet for things like fileservers, whereas high-end scientific/database computing etc on Unix workstations did.
Intel trying to push everyone to Itanium shows they knew back then that they needed a 64 bit solution. They just chose the wrong way to do it and fucked up the execution, letting AMD in.
WSL1 was an NT kernel personality. It worked, but only sortakinda, which is why we now have WSL2.
This is /not/ an NT kernel personality because it turns out that wasn't actually fit for purpose, it is a tightly integrated virtual machine and does not rely on the NT native API; it runs a full, actual Linux kernel.
The PostScript function generator (which is Forth-like, not LISP-like) is very specifically limited to a small number of operators such that it is not Turing complete. In particular you get no control transfer instructions other than, iirc, if/else.
Not sure that PDFs as a whole are Turing complete for similar reasons. It's just a really complex spec.
Waaaay back in the NT4 days Windows Server had a different default scheduler in the kernel, more suited to batch-oriented/background service type stuff than maintaining a snappy UI. Would be surprised if that's still true or significant today though.
'Any decent compiler should strip out any extraneous characters, assuming the code is indeed being compiled beforehand and not interpreted at run-time.'
- not quite sure what this means. You literally can't put a bunch of tabs (or spaces) in machine code or even bytecode, that's what a compiler is producing after all.
So....just like your C++ example then? There are essentially two C++ ABIs, MSVC and the various Unixes (these days mostly meaning gcc+clang), all of which these days follow architecture-specific variations of what used to be called the Itanium ABI.
Meanwhile Windows and the various Unixes can and do have different C function calling conventions on the same architecture (x86-64 for example) in exactly the same way.