There is a certain kind of programmer who wants to implement stuff as programs running other programs on whatever specific operating system, passing output of one to the next program that may or may not be installed or at the location or version you expect.
— Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) December 8, 2023
People need to…
Seriously just expose a function no need for your gay-butt shell scripting language. Unrelated, but oil-shell guy is strag (See the re-write it in rust incident).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
What does he mean “call functions” in this context.
I can't say I've used Unix pipes and thought “this is the weakest link in the chain right right now”
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
In the context of compilers (what he is working on), traditional compilers would output assembly files that they would pipe into an assembler which would produce object files that then a linker combines into the final binary executable/library. E.g. gcc -> as -> ld. This is r-slurred and fragile.
Instead, just call functions that compile, assemble, and link that are in your actual compiler executable and not a part of the environment.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Like is everything statically linked, is that what you mean?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's not a matter of dynamic vs static linking.* It's a matter of calling a function vs piping some shit between multiple running programs.
*Although I think dynamic linking is pretty r-slurred for the same reason: it's complicated and error prone since it's a part of your specific environment + package manager config.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Oh yeah that does seem like a Unix moment.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context