asciilifeform: out of fear of usg ? or from vanity ( he thinks it can be sold for millions ? to whom ? ) he is burning his life's work. i have nfi why.
asciilifeform: somebody , maybe same old man, has a bookcase full of typewritten design apocrypha, memoes, etc. from ivory group. he ain't sharing either.
asciilifeform: the unfortunate bit is that reti et al seem intent to take their seekritz to their graves, because they are 'law-abiding' and are still honouring their nda to the dead hand of the dead man
asciilifeform: fromloper: i'll confirm, this is a larger and moar detailed document than old one.
asciilifeform: ( and yes mircea_popescu's answer was 'shuddup and suck it' . which is very easily said when you ain't the one sucking it )
asciilifeform: apeloyee: look at the trb tree, and picture what the mass of the patches would have been, if this requirement had been in effect when i made it.☟︎
asciilifeform: fromloper: correct. almost totally useless.
asciilifeform: i do not have, nor ever had, a working 'ivory' of any description.
asciilifeform: ( or what it expects to find on the bus, or almost anything else )☟︎
asciilifeform: so i'ma save mine for proper commercial lab. but that means potentially forever. maybe whoever takes it off my corpse, can get it photo'd.
asciilifeform: fromloper: i only have two 'ivory' chips, and ideally would like to leave one intact , for active test . iirc phf also has 2 to use.
asciilifeform: apeloyee: trinqueian / mircea_popescuine vtron is arguably The Right Thing. my observation is that it may be a 50kg sword.
asciilifeform: apeloyee: observe , i do not actually disagree .
asciilifeform: fromloper: that's where it stopped. i do not have 25k usd to use on ivory die photo.
asciilifeform: fromloper: i shopped around in commercial labs; the best bid was in the neighbourhood of 25,000 usd.
asciilifeform: fromloper: that was phf's plan. afaik he has not, as of yet.
asciilifeform: apeloyee: there is not a mechanical solution to preventing someone from 'putting in format c:' proverbially
asciilifeform: fromloper: it is not a complete arch description, you cannot write a working emulator with it ( or even make the existing snap4 not-crash )
asciilifeform: fromloper: pretty sure i've seen this before
asciilifeform: however it DOES mean even ~more~ work for folx using v, than ever before. and not less.☟︎
asciilifeform: i don't have a good counter-argument to this.
asciilifeform: iirc mircea_popescu's argument was that it is wrong to say that they could ~ever~ be properly independent. and that if they could be shown to be independent, they ought to be separate v-trees.☟︎
asciilifeform: and in both cases, the ability to explicitly mark subsystems as independent ( e.g. a readme.txt being independent from doesallthework.adb ) is lost.
asciilifeform: trinque is right tho, they are equivalent
asciilifeform: ( it borders, e.g., columbia. nothing exploded there ?0 )
asciilifeform: fenómenos que "no tiene antecedentes" en el país << orly?☟︎
asciilifeform: BingoBoingo: and on most days they do not ?
asciilifeform: so it is not correct to say 'you made the man do what the machine could do.' rather, lightened the work for operator for one kind of operation, and made heavier -- other kind.
asciilifeform: it severely constrains the kind of things you can do without manual surgery
asciilifeform: as i described in the linked thread, forcing the entire program under the antecedent hasher is not free
asciilifeform: ( asciilifeform traded his lispm for two last-made lispm single-ic cpu... )
asciilifeform: and yes it is entirely true that files-are-not-guaranteedly-independent.
asciilifeform: apeloyee: trinque and mircea_popescu would like to put more of it on the machine. i haven't with what to dissuade them, it is a philosophical q, not even technical.
asciilifeform: apeloyee: see the quite 'flammable' log from that thread. i put the burden of correct operation ~100% on the human operator.☟︎
asciilifeform: apeloyee: some of the 'cvsism' is deliberate -- cvs made collaborative writing harder by accident, we -- on purpose !11
asciilifeform: ( i will omit the rest of the mechanism, i think it is pretty obvious )
asciilifeform: the first cell has a false HasPrev ; the last -- a false HasNext.
asciilifeform: so a stack cell would contain not only an FZ of the current bitness, but two boolean values, e.g. HasPrev and HasNext
asciilifeform: nao that i think about it, it doesn't even have to introduce 'access types' ( pointers in ada ) , can use ordinary integers
asciilifeform: you can trivially show that any attempt to walk under or over the stack, would have to involve a null-dereference.
asciilifeform: currently it actually seems to me , to be cleaner -- in that its correctness proof is simpler, does not use arithmetic at all
asciilifeform: whether this is cleaner than the existing item, i will leave up to the readers, incl. apeloyee .
asciilifeform: want() would then vanish; both stack underflow and overflow checks would be handled by the nullity check ( first cell has a null in its 'prev' slot; last cell in stack -- in its 'next' . )
asciilifeform: however this introduces explicit pointerism. ( though, i will add, NOT pointer-arithmetism )☟︎
asciilifeform: apeloyee: here's another idea from my notes , that would do the job : to dispense with the array representation for the stack, in favour of linked list. ada permits the definition of a 'not null' pointer type (whose non-nullity is checked on every reference) .
asciilifeform: ( prolly still are today, somewhere in ssl liquishit )
asciilifeform: incidentally there were pivot-position bugs in commonly-used karatsubas as late as the early 2000s.
asciilifeform: or for another example, take the ugliness and 'pointericity' of the traditional 'pivoting' form of karatsuba. which i killed by forcing all FZ bitnesses to be powers of 2.
asciilifeform: ideally so as to maximally compartmentalize and document the ugly
asciilifeform: one way to model this process is that there is an 'ugliness budget', just like there is a cpu cycle budget, that can be 'spent' in certain ways
asciilifeform: ftr several different items in ffa seemed to me to be 'five-angled heptagons' (starting with how to compute the asm-less addition carries) until i solved'em
