asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: what i wanted to establish was the ~whynot~
asciilifeform: phf: is this experiment documented somewhere?
asciilifeform: aaaactually if sbcl, cmucl, or whichever lisptron, could be whittled down to 'get char', 'put char', 'malloc' -- could be on iron tonight.
asciilifeform: (sbcl runs well today precisely because it is 'sharpened' for linux)
asciilifeform: which is ~unsuitable for 'metallization', see today's earlier thread.
asciilifeform: and i can see why they do it, even buying ~one~, e.g., UART, today, is not easy
asciilifeform: folx keep makin' these nonsense abortions.
asciilifeform: phf: aha. the z80 is ~decorative on such a box.
asciilifeform: is in no real 1980s sense 'fits in head'
asciilifeform: it offloads a megatonne of work onto a modern micro
asciilifeform: phf et al: actually this is example of TERRIBLE 'retrocomp' design
asciilifeform: i thought mircea_popescu ends up with DShK shells in pockets when comes back from roof.
asciilifeform: maggots dun have plans, or objectives, they simply eat.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: it'd get quite painful for a large proggy.☟︎
asciilifeform: (instead of uploading proggy repeatedly and waiting for output)
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: and picture if it had been on your actual comp.
asciilifeform mutters something about naggum's bathtub catapult
asciilifeform: if cpu wants to move, add, subtract, etc. a bitstring, it has a length glued to it, and a type (that indicates, among other things, what it means to 'add' it, say), also glued to it.
asciilifeform: on a proper lispmtronic comp, there is no juggling of 'pointers' or any other naked, unannotated bitstrings.
asciilifeform: it did, though not in the peculiar 'stick shift' way described by mircea_popescu earlier
asciilifeform: aha so mircea_popescu is simply asking for lispm, lol.
asciilifeform: on a proper lispm (definitionally) it is done by the iron.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: in sane programming system (e.g., lisps) nobody gets to point to 'memory address'. they point to an item that necessarily and unseparably carries not only address (not visible to or alterable by the operator, normally) but also a type and -- when the thing is >1 machine word in size -- a size.
asciilifeform: but if you had something clever in mind, around this, i'm all ears
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: for so long as memory is sold as a dumb capacitor grid, cpu can necessarily address all of it (that is, all of the connected ones)
asciilifeform: holy fuq why would you give the operator raw pointers.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: ada's 'modular types' come to mind
asciilifeform: (instead of 1 model of computation, you now have 3 -- that you know about. plus others, unwanted, resulting from interactions b/w the 3.)
asciilifeform: at the cost of destroying whatever conceptual integrity machine might otherwise have.
asciilifeform: they make it possible to actually do any work on von neumann monstrosity.
asciilifeform: interrupts, dma, are relics from dark age when there was 1 cpu and it cost most of what the machine cost.
asciilifeform: (yet unpublished) 'p' is a 'bytecode' system -- all ops are 1 byte long, and take no operands, and all bytes are valid ops.
asciilifeform: name 'bytecode' simply came about because making the opcodes 1 octet long is convenient
asciilifeform: e.g., perl, python, tinyscheme, many forths
asciilifeform: well ~all interpreted programming languages use 'bytecode' or some variant (i.e. emulator for fictional cpu that fits the task)
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: nah, 'jets' were a terrifying crackpottery where he promised to 'recognize algorithms' and 'transparently' substitute in optimized/c-tronic routines
asciilifeform: trinque: i must note: just because asciilifeform barfed, does not mean that a clean solution to the problem cannot exist. only that he did not find one.
