1100+ entries in 0.135s
Mocky: ^ circa '96 "The goal of this binding is to make scripting language features, such as associative arrays, regular expression matching, and execution of OS commands available to an
Ada programmer and to allow a Tcl programmer to use
Ada in place of C where needed"
phf: asciilifeform: well there apparently used to be a unix shell in 1980s that was written in
ada, i suspect it's not the gsh above, but something else entirely
phf: (^ POSIX shell for windows written in
Ada, presumably for adacore build toolchain)
phf: asciilifeform: i saw somewhere suggested that there used to be a unix shell written in
ada with some kind of
ada like semantics, you know anything about that?
a111: Logged on 2018-07-24 16:31 asciilifeform: it went approx like this, iirc some time in 2016 : asciilifeform : 'if quality slavegurlz can be trained to do anything , mircea_popescu couldja spare 1 or 2 for
ada battallion ' mircea_popescu : 'hell no, why would i waste any on such a thing; what next, i will ask asciilifeform to do field work detail in their place ? '
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 13:42 asciilifeform: phf: say what you will re
ada standard, but e.g. ffa is ( afaik! ) a nontrivial and at same time ada2012-compliant proggy.
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 14:06 phf: i took a different approach, i wrote _to
ada standard_ with the idea that each interface can be substituted with a custom system specific replacement. for example my character_io is a new_line aware replacement of the original, that relies on
ada.sequential_io. now if i wanted to retarget to small machine, i'd write a custom sequential_io that uses machine specific calls for byte read/write
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 13:53 phf: interfaces.c is not a libc concern, it's an ffi. the situation is that C can't be linked to an
Ada, even if the C part has _no libc_ in it
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 13:46 phf: or is tmsr
ada whatever ave1 put into his musl build, which is, worse, a political situation. diana_coman can argue for her ffi stuff to be included, should i be arguing for my get/put stuff to be included?
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 13:45 phf: as far as
ada is concerned, the tmsr
ada is a subset of standard, that only exists in your head, and can be somewhat inferred from ffa. that's no standard
mircea_popescu: (i meant especially re the "
Ada standard turned out to be dodgy (very precisely specifies some shitty solutions)" art.
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 13:41 phf: asciilifeform: oh yeah, i get it, the approach requires a GOST cpu with a GOST bus etc. etc. right now the situation is mildly depressing (though perhaps that's not the right word), even
Ada standard turned out to be dodgy (very precisely specifies some shitty solutions)
ave1: I've played little with the bb-runtimes but the whole build process is based python + gprbuild and needs at least
ada 2017 sources.
ave1: btw I understood that esa still uses Leon processors with
ADA ave1: the same with interfaces.c, a version without secondary stack can be easily made (I have one already, simple method of cutting out functions), but is then not really
ada standard anymore.
phf: i took a different approach, i wrote _to
ada standard_ with the idea that each interface can be substituted with a custom system specific replacement. for example my character_io is a new_line aware replacement of the original, that relies on
ada.sequential_io. now if i wanted to retarget to small machine, i'd write a custom sequential_io that uses machine specific calls for byte read/write
☟︎ phf: right, an
ada with an absolute minimum/custom runtime
phf: asciilifeform: i thought that you were arguing that the subset of
ada runtime that's included in zfp "ought to be enough for everyone", since at the moment i believe it compiles ffa, my apologies.
phf: interfaces.c is not a libc concern, it's an ffi. the situation is that C can't be linked to an
Ada, even if the C part has _no libc_ in it
☟︎ phf: oh i was talking about the later, since that's the avant guard of the
ada situation
phf: or is tmsr
ada whatever ave1 put into his musl build, which is, worse, a political situation. diana_coman can argue for her ffi stuff to be included, should i be arguing for my get/put stuff to be included?
☟︎ phf: as far as
ada is concerned, the tmsr
ada is a subset of standard, that only exists in your head, and can be somewhat inferred from ffa. that's no standard
☟︎ phf: asciilifeform: oh yeah, i get it, the approach requires a GOST cpu with a GOST bus etc. etc. right now the situation is mildly depressing (though perhaps that's not the right word), even
Ada standard turned out to be dodgy (very precisely specifies some shitty solutions)
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2018-07-07 18:19 mircea_popescu: esthlos welcome to the mechanisms of lordship. it's your project, it's your job to make this sort of decisions. "should this be rewritten in lisp, imported in
ada, be turned into a point of grafting on eucrypt tree ?"
phf: ok, thank you. afaiu though ave1's build is potentially missing all kinds of system integration components, or is the retargeting against custom
ada stdlib optional?
phf: ave1, asciilifeform or other
ada specialists, how did you bootstrap a gnat on aarch64? is there some binary that's floating around (because adacore doesn't seem to have linux-aarch64 build) or is it bootstrapped using a cross compiler on a x86 linux?
mircea_popescu: esthlos welcome to the mechanisms of lordship. it's your project, it's your job to make this sort of decisions. "should this be rewritten in lisp, imported in
ada, be turned into a point of grafting on eucrypt tree ?"
☟︎ mircea_popescu: esthlos of course, if your whole thing is lisp, the utility of
ada keccak may be limited ?
ave1: asciilifeform, yes that was my first reaction too. It does does something with word copying though and also individual files can be build without any of the extra gnat checks. So maybe the
ada versions can be stand-ins so long as a native asm based version has not been written.
a111: Logged on 2018-01-22 16:40 asciilifeform: gnat has a deliberately brittle behaviour re the restriction pragmas -- if you use one it doesn't know about, it barfs. ( and i'm not even convinced that this is wrong. half of the appeal of
ada is that it takes 'postel's law', rips off its head, and fucks the stump )
spyked:
http://btcbase.org/log/2018-07-02#1831425 <-- to add to the list of weird behaviours:
ada "get char" function doesn't eat newlines, so when typing a number alone, say: echo "42" | ./test_repl , nothing'll happen. user must add an explicit space after the number.
☝︎ mircea_popescu:
ada already has very strong bounds ~checks~. but if he's doing a whole adalisp, well...
ave1: trinque, The directory for the script needs to absolute, i.e. ./build-
ada.sh output --> ./build-
ada.sh $PWD/output
a111: Logged on 2017-11-12 23:07 spyked: in other news, I've been using most of my spare cycles lisping in
ada. should be able to wrap up a blog post sharing a very minimal prototype (sane implem. of repl doing nothing but basic ops) in a few weeks. what I've got now adheres to most of ffa constraints. the current version isn't very clean, but getting there...
a111: Logged on 2017-10-08 14:06 phf: spyked: r5rs and tinyscheme are not the right places to start on the other, non-
ada end, i'd recommend looking at lisp in small pieces. you can tease out the theory out of tinyscheme, but it's definitely easier not to get bogged on accidentals if you start from theory
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform no but this is my point. "why are you using emacs when in fact trb will need
ada scheme anyway and then you could just have a musl-gnat nerwmacs" ?
ave1: I.E. I could reprocude this error by first compiling aarch64 with ../extra/build-tarballs.sh $PREFIX musl
ada aarch64 and then running the script with making that line: ../extra/build-tarballs.sh $PREFIX musl
ada x86_64
a111: Logged on 2018-06-04 04:26 ave1: asciilifeform, also what is in the build-
ada.sh? the last line on aarch64 should read: ../extra/build-tarballs.sh $PREFIX musl
ada aarch64 x86_64
ave1: asciilifeform, I did get it to cross compile on aarch64 too, it was a question of more memory. Do you still have an error log? Also the order has to be correct in the build-
ada.sh. Like so:
http://btcbase.org/log/2018-06-04#1820499 ☝︎ mircea_popescu: asciilifeform not really ; can get away with letting grandfathered systems work it. exactly how we bootstrap
ada.
deedbot: diana_coman updated rating of ave1 from 2 to 3 << made the very useful scripts to compile gnat for various architectures as well as other useful
ada &
ada+c bits; does a lot and talks a little, always on point though; writes at ave1.org
ave1: asciilifeform, also what is in the build-
ada.sh? the last line on aarch64 should read: ../extra/build-tarballs.sh $PREFIX musl
ada aarch64 x86_64
☟︎ ave1: and 'ls /home/stas/temp/
ada-musl-cross-2018-04-30/bin'
ave1: plus, could you try 'ls /home/stas/temp/
ada-musl-cross-2018-04-30/bin/aarch64-linux-musl-native'
ave1: asciilifeform, the .../temp//
ada-musl-cross-2018-04-30/bin is empty?
ave1: I'll also post the resulting
ada aarch64 compiler
trinque: I don't see that eucrypt code includes the
ada compiler? why not?
mimisbrunnr: Logged on 2018-05-23 05:16 ben_vulpes: Mocky: why's that
ada article not on the homepage of yer blog?
ben_vulpes: Mocky: why's that
ada article not on the homepage of yer blog?
deedbot: esthlos rated Mocky 2 << delicious post on
Ada esthlos: !!rate Mocky 2 delicious post on
Ada a111: Logged on 2015-04-28 17:29 mircea_popescu: because much like
ada, brainfuck is an actually specified language
a111: Logged on 2012-08-21 09:20 mircea_popescu: honestly i thought ruby is dead like
ada.
deedbot: asciilifeform rated Mocky 1 << 'why
ada'
a111: Logged on 2018-05-19 18:30 asciilifeform: ( folx-on-the-periphery-of-l1 : might be a good use of coupla hrs to dredge the logs for 'why
ada' material that could point n00bz to, e.g.
http://btcbase.org/log/2017-07-13#1682480 )
a111: Logged on 2018-05-19 18:14 Mocky: speaking of plot twists, pretty surprised by the
Ada usage. I pictured usg.DOD-design-by-committee lang commissioned to help build out the chumpatronic-mass-programmer infrastructure for gov contracts. I guess it's time to reevaluate my priors.
a111: Logged on 2015-02-13 23:03 asciilifeform: i suspect that mircea_popescu would actually like
ada. not writing it, mind you, but seeing it written
a111: Logged on 2017-07-13 15:16 asciilifeform: the other thing to remember, is that the win from writing in
ada - but not in
ada in general, but the style demonstrated in ffa in particular -- remains even if YOU HAVE NO ACCESS TO GNAT and gotta compile by hand into asm. because it forces the style of algo that CAN be safely so expressed - i.e. without presumption of pointerolade arithmetic, gc, or other cost-externalizing electrosocialisms
Mocky: speaking of plot twists, pretty surprised by the
Ada usage. I pictured usg.DOD-design-by-committee lang commissioned to help build out the chumpatronic-mass-programmer infrastructure for gov contracts. I guess it's time to reevaluate my priors.
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2018-05-15 21:28 asciilifeform: diana_coman: steps to replicate: 0) on a machine WITH A WORKING GNAT (e.g. adacore's , and it must be in your path already ) 1 ) download the tarball from
http://ave1.org/2018/building-gnat-on-musl-now-with-partial-and-parallel-build-support 2) unpack tarball
ada-musl-cross-2018-05-15.tgz , go to the dir 3) mkdir bin << this is where the built binariola will live 4) ./build-
ada.sh /home/foo/temp/
ada/
ada-musl-cross-2018-05-15/bin
a111: Logged on 2018-05-16 14:42 asciilifeform: ( retaining some knob for dynamic linkage isn't totally useless, it enables such things as valgrind ; but i'm quite prepared to lose valgrind, it is not really so necessary when writing asciilifeform-style -- heapless --
ada )
ave1: ../extra/build-tarballs.sh $PREFIX musl
ada aarch64 x86_64
ave1: it's last line is now: ../extra/build-tarballs.sh $PREFIX musl
ada x86_64 aarch64
ave1: it's the 'build-
ada.sh' script