/tech/ - Technology

>>30075
>avoiding RPC.
There's also the complexity and performance cost of marshalling and unmarshalling data all over the place which thought recently ran into.
Something like Cap 'n Proto doesn't seem to have this problem.

2010 called.

>>30079
Ironically 8M And Constantly Swapping is pretty light compared to any editor with modern sensibilities. What do you think about the MicroEMACSen and other small clones like qemacs though?

>>30081
>Ironically 8M And Constantly Swapping is pretty light compared to any editor with modern sensibilities.
This is true.

>What do you think about the MicroEMACSen and other small clones like qemacs though?
These seem to be missing essential primitives, means of composition, and/or means of abstraction. Something like Edwin (a nice Old-English name) is closer in terms of small Emacsen, but alas MIT Scheme lacks the primitives (namely an interface to the outside world) to support a great text editor. (There have been attempts to port Edwin to portable R7RS which with SRFI has a partial interface to the outside world implemented.) Had mg installed on my computer at one point, and it's nice that it was tractable.

>>30087
The other problem with Edwin of course is that it's very unpopular, and so doesn't have all the packages which make Emacs a great.

>>30088
>packages
Honestly modern FSF Emacs is a clusterfuck and the package ecosystem is a culprit as well. For example the ada-mode package refuses to compile on my machine, while the XEmacs equivalent works flawlessly. Moving from elisp parsing to brittle helper programs seems to have been a mistake (except for slime of course, everyone loves slime).

>>30092
reimplementing parsers for every text-editor in every language doesn't seem like a good idea.
would think compilers would want to make there parsers available for text-editors to use.

>>30093
Then again having the compiler implement a standardized parse-tree to rat on the implementation details may be too much to ask.

last time I looked at suckless it was full of chvds, including one of its contributors whining about cultural marxism on lobste.rs

>>30105
isn't every community of programming hobbyists either full of rightoids, lead by a wokechvd committee, or has an uneasy truce between the two? it's easy to find high-profile chuds, ancraps and otherwise terrible people in the software minimalism niche, but you also see people like the antix lead dev, leahneukirchen or most often some inoffensive lib, who at most complains about "software freedom" and "goverment surveillance" sometimes.

another thread full of platitudes and discourse disguised as technical discussion. no concrete criticism or alternative projects, just vibes

>>30105
the guys are neonazis and I don't understand why anyone takes them seriously. their stuff is lazy, not minimalist, there is no reason to use dwm instead of writing your own window manager. you can read an xlib/xcb tutorial and write something better (with runtime configuration, for example) in less than a week. literally just go to github.com/explore and search for window managers

open source and "minimalism" appeal to the idea of the lone programmer and inventor, they obviously attract and even foster a petite bourgeois mentality like small businesses. but this mindset is even more aggro and virulent than that of the small owner because the material circumstances of the oss maintainer are more precarious. there is nothing stopping companies or other developers from appropriating their work and making a superior alternative, basically taking over their place. this pathetic position is why they lash out so violently against "the woke", "code of conduct", "trains" and whatever other culture war boogeyman redundant classification, the culture war itself is fake and a distraction

personally I claim to be trans on my github and codeberg profiles to keep chuds away from my projects

>>30107
>their stuff is lazy, not minimalist
You have to be a programmer yourself to appreciate how cutting complexity at the right places can make software infinitely more predictable and easier to modify. See http://winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html for the social problems this creates.

DWMs design could be described as orthodox new jersey, by only coding in the few features everyone needs and writing patches for a couple of others. The status bar is accessible through x11 properties, using dmenu and sxhkd for launcher and hotkey functionality respectively is sound, the lack of any interfaces to window placement is objectively a bad design decision. Ultimately suckless programs are just small utilities done right, they're generally pleasant to work with unless you have legacy requirements, nothing on the level of elegance as s6 or qmail though. My personal window manager is fvwm, it's not pretty but has a nice featureset.

>>30109
>You have to be a programmer yourself to appreciate how cutting complexity at the right places can make software infinitely more predictable and easier to modify
there's a limit to how much you can do this. but yeah a lot of FOSS projects suffer from NIH, rather than just linking to other free libraries for functionality

>>30106
Just look for the ones with queers and furries in them, sparkledogs scare away the chuds and HOA officers like cats on a ship.