Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #25425 > unrolled thread
| Started by | gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-01-04 11:00 +0000 |
| Last post | 2021-02-12 15:40 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 157 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi
AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-04 11:00 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-04 11:42 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-04 13:08 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-04 17:51 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-04 21:57 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-04 22:23 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-04 23:09 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2021-01-04 17:50 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-04 23:00 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-04 16:59 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2021-01-04 20:42 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2021-01-04 20:59 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2021-01-04 20:55 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-05 10:38 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2021-01-05 12:46 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-05 13:43 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2021-01-05 14:23 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 15:22 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2021-01-05 09:05 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 10:51 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-05 11:52 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 12:06 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-01-05 20:12 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 11:45 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 14:25 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2021-01-04 20:38 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 11:54 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 14:06 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 22:52 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 10:29 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-01-04 11:05 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-04 17:07 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-01-04 17:52 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 10:28 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2021-01-05 13:06 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 13:41 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 15:30 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-05 16:42 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-01-05 20:12 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 20:20 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-05 22:23 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-01-06 00:14 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-06 02:17 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2021-01-08 14:39 +0100
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-08 15:07 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-08 15:56 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-08 15:35 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-08 20:02 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2021-01-10 15:12 +0100
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-06 09:36 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-06 10:43 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-06 18:09 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-06 18:29 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-06 18:37 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-06 21:03 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2021-01-08 14:45 +0100
Re: AI and decompilation? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-01-08 18:06 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-08 18:44 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2021-01-09 03:02 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2021-01-09 02:58 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-06 18:35 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-06 18:39 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-06 19:03 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-06 19:08 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-06 19:19 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-07 04:07 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-07 12:59 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-01-08 21:41 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-01-09 12:25 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-09 12:46 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-09 15:49 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-09 18:33 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-09 19:20 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-09 21:05 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-09 23:19 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-10 12:17 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-01-09 16:54 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-09 23:48 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2021-01-10 02:00 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2021-01-09 18:36 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-09 19:28 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-10 12:15 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-10 12:33 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-10 13:18 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-10 14:01 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2021-01-10 15:14 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-10 13:59 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-10 14:46 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-10 15:34 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-10 15:05 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Axel Berger <Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> - 2021-01-10 17:28 +0100
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-11 17:25 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2021-01-10 15:13 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-10 15:35 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-10 15:35 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2021-01-10 17:23 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-10 18:17 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-11 03:44 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2021-01-11 11:00 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-11 03:36 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-06 21:34 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2021-01-06 18:37 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-01-08 21:09 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-06 09:32 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2021-01-08 14:56 +0100
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 14:25 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2021-01-06 14:17 +0200
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-06 12:42 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2021-01-06 16:42 +0200
Re: AI and decompilation? "Kerr-Mudd,John" <notsaying@127.0.0.1> - 2021-01-08 09:48 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-08 10:27 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2021-01-08 21:40 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 14:06 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-05 22:27 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-01-06 00:14 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-06 08:25 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-01-08 21:52 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-09 15:37 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-10 06:40 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-01-06 15:15 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-06 16:09 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-01-06 17:07 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> - 2021-01-06 17:38 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2021-01-05 21:20 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-04 17:47 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2021-01-04 14:18 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-04 16:54 -0700
Re: AI and decompilation? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2021-01-04 23:01 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-04 20:11 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 09:07 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-05 09:47 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 11:13 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 12:12 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 13:39 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 15:32 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 15:40 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-01-05 16:02 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-05 18:27 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 21:15 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 22:54 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 11:56 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2021-01-05 14:11 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2021-01-05 14:22 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 15:35 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-01-05 18:47 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-01-05 20:15 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2021-01-05 07:32 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-01-05 16:00 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> - 2021-01-05 11:26 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2021-01-05 13:07 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-01-05 13:42 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-05 18:31 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? "K. Krause" <klemens.krause@gmx.net> - 2021-01-05 16:01 +0100
Re: AI and decompilation? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2021-01-05 20:51 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-01-05 22:51 +0000
Re: AI and decompilation? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-01-08 22:23 -0500
Re: AI and decompilation? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-02-12 15:40 +0000
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-06 18:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <i5me79F9sn6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #25557 |
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> Martin Gregorie wrote:
>
>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables
>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal.
>
> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser
or wasm, which can run compiled code from
C
C++
C#
Kotlin
Rust etc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-06 18:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rt504d$8qu$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25559 |
On 06/01/2021 18:35, Andy Burns wrote: > The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Martin Gregorie wrote: >> >>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables >>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal. >> >> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser > > or wasm, which can run compiled code from > > C > C++ > C# > Kotlin > Rust etc How can you run code compiled for *86 on a ARM based browser? -- The New Left are the people they warned you about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-06 19:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rt51hc$llm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25562 |
On 06/01/2021 18:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 06/01/2021 18:35, Andy Burns wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Martin Gregorie wrote: >>> >>>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables >>>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal. >>> >>> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser >> >> or wasm, which can run compiled code from >> >> C >> C++ >> C# >> Kotlin >> Rust etc > > How can you run code compiled for *86 on a ARM based browser? > > Use an intermediate language and a virtual machine, similar to Java JVM or .net runtime.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-06 19:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rt51qu$mjb$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25565 |
On 06/01/2021 19:03, Pancho wrote: > On 06/01/2021 18:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 06/01/2021 18:35, Andy Burns wrote: >>> The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>>> Martin Gregorie wrote: >>>> >>>>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables >>>>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal. >>>> >>>> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser >>> >>> or wasm, which can run compiled code from >>> >>> C >>> C++ >>> C# >>> Kotlin >>> Rust etc >> >> How can you run code compiled for *86 on a ARM based browser? >> >> > Use an intermediate language and a virtual machine, similar to Java JVM > or .net runtime. yeah. I looked it up... -- Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age. Richard Lindzen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-06 19:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rt52fb$sp8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25566 |
On 06/01/2021 19:08, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 06/01/2021 19:03, Pancho wrote: >> On 06/01/2021 18:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 06/01/2021 18:35, Andy Burns wrote: >>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> >>>>> Martin Gregorie wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables >>>>>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal. >>>>> >>>>> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser >>>> >>>> or wasm, which can run compiled code from >>>> >>>> C >>>> C++ >>>> C# >>>> Kotlin >>>> Rust etc >>> >>> How can you run code compiled for *86 on a ARM based browser? >>> >>> >> Use an intermediate language and a virtual machine, similar to Java >> JVM or .net runtime. > yeah. I looked it up... > So my looking it up was a waste of time ;-) I've always found web GUI work very difficult. I keep hoping someone will make it as simple a native GUI, but it still seems overly difficult.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-07 04:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rt61d9$s87$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25567 |
On 06/01/2021 19:19, Pancho wrote:
> On 06/01/2021 19:08, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 06/01/2021 19:03, Pancho wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2021 18:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2021 18:35, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables
>>>>>>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser
>>>>>
>>>>> or wasm, which can run compiled code from
>>>>>
>>>>> C
>>>>> C++
>>>>> C#
>>>>> Kotlin
>>>>> Rust etc
>>>>
>>>> How can you run code compiled for *86 on a ARM based browser?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Use an intermediate language and a virtual machine, similar to Java
>>> JVM or .net runtime.
>> yeah. I looked it up...
>>
>
> So my looking it up was a waste of time ;-)
>
> I've always found web GUI work very difficult. I keep hoping someone
> will make it as simple a native GUI, but it still seems overly difficult.
>
Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my life.
Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho
--
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that
the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."
- Bertrand Russell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-07 12:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rt70im$81v$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25574 |
On Thu, 07 Jan 2021 04:07:05 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 06/01/2021 19:19, Pancho wrote: >> On 06/01/2021 19:08, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 06/01/2021 19:03, Pancho wrote: >>>> On 06/01/2021 18:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>> On 06/01/2021 18:35, Andy Burns wrote: >>>>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Martin Gregorie wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> if you use crappy interpreted languages with untyped variables >>>>>>>> then you've chosen to accept that sort of thing as normal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sadly javaScript is all you get in a browser >>>>>> >>>>>> or wasm, which can run compiled code from >>>>>> >>>>>> C >>>>>> C++ >>>>>> C# Kotlin Rust etc >>>>> >>>>> How can you run code compiled for *86 on a ARM based browser? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Use an intermediate language and a virtual machine, similar to Java >>>> JVM or .net runtime. >>> yeah. I looked it up... >>> >>> >> So my looking it up was a waste of time ;-) >> >> I've always found web GUI work very difficult. I keep hoping someone >> will make it as simple a native GUI, but it still seems overly >> difficult. >> > Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my life. > Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho Same, apart from the Javascript and X-Windows: I don't use either. However, implementing GUI windows in Java with AWT and Swing is easy enough, particularly if you use the 3rd party se.datadosen.riverlayout package to control object placement on windows and panels. PHP is quite easy to write too, though it can be a bit harder to debug than Java. The O'Reilly PHP book is pretty good. Curses works well if you just want to format a console screen and, in any case, its easy enough to re-implement if you you need its capabilities in a language that can't call functions from the C standard library. -- -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-08 21:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <f95ivfhtt0hfbthee840a18orgq1dnelst@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #25574 |
On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 04:07:05 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> declaimed the following: >Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my life. >Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho I did X-Window some 30 years ago (DECWindows variant). I'm talking base X-Toolkit level, no such thing as KDE/GTK/wxWindow.... Even worse, I had to have the X-Window code invoke Graphical Kernel System code for the actual data display (I needed a Display List capability as the application was replacing a Ramtek 9300 graphics engine, AND the controlling application(s) were run as separate processes -- one would be responsible for drawing the axes&labels, one would draw colored boxes based upon data read from a large file, one handled creation of rubber band regions for filtering said data... And screen refreshes had to be possible without rerunning the original data processes (could take 15-30 minutes just to read the data file for the colored boxes, and among refresh events was "turning layers on/off" -- like the axes could be hidden, the rubber band triggered a refresh each time a line segment was confirmed). -- Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 12:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtc7cg$nm6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25574 |
On 07/01/2021 04:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my life. > Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho > > Yeah, I didn't mean X, or even rather comically Curses. I meant: WinForms, WPF, Swing as opposed to: Angular or React. Even Asp.Net was much harder than WinForms.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 12:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtc8jo$ve5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25655 |
On 09/01/2021 12:25, Pancho wrote: > On 07/01/2021 04:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my >> life. Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho >> >> > Yeah, I didn't mean X, or even rather comically Curses. I meant: > WinForms, WPF, Swing as opposed to: Angular or React. Even Asp.Net was > much harder than WinForms. never heard of any of them. I guess they are Windows junk, -- “The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.” Herbert Spencer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 15:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtcjan$563$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25656 |
On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 12:46:48 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 09/01/2021 12:25, Pancho wrote: >> On 07/01/2021 04:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my >>> life. Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho >>> >>> >> Yeah, I didn't mean X, or even rather comically Curses. I meant: >> WinForms, WPF, Swing as opposed to: Angular or React. Even Asp.Net was >> much harder than WinForms. > > never heard of any of them. I guess they are Windows junk, Curses is purest C - it sits on top of the termcap functions and adds capabilities like pop-up subwindows Swing (and AWT) are Java graphics packages included in the standard class library, available since at least Java 2. They are fairly high level classes, implementing buttons, menus, scrollable resizable windows etc. as well as a mouse interface. -- -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 18:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtcst0$ii9$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25666 |
On 09/01/2021 15:49, Martin Gregorie wrote: > On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 12:46:48 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> On 09/01/2021 12:25, Pancho wrote: >>> On 07/01/2021 04:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>>> Oh. reverse for me. couldn't write an X window program to save my >>>> life. Quite happy to design stuff in html and javascript tho >>>> >>>> >>> Yeah, I didn't mean X, or even rather comically Curses. I meant: >>> WinForms, WPF, Swing as opposed to: Angular or React. Even Asp.Net was >>> much harder than WinForms. >> >> never heard of any of them. I guess they are Windows junk, > > Curses is purest C - it sits on top of the termcap functions and adds > capabilities like pop-up subwindows > > Swing (and AWT) are Java graphics packages included in the standard class > library, available since at least Java 2. They are fairly high level > classes, implementing buttons, menus, scrollable resizable windows etc. > as well as a mouse interface. > > > Never used java. Runtime is enormous...I know curses. Looked at gtk toolkit and decided learning curve too big. And web and browser based was in fact more portable than native code -- "In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is true: it is true because it is powerful." Lucas Bergkamp
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 19:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtcvlk$563$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25668 |
On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 18:33:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Never used java. Runtime is enormous...I know curses. > Depends what the program is: Hello World in Java is 419 bytes (the C version is 19554 bytes and the source is smaller too (21 lines, 147 chars vs 26 lines, 282 chars) and anyway I like the WORA principle > Looked at gtk toolkit and decided learning curve too big. > Thats interesting - I've wondered about learning gtk, but so far have always used Java instead: once you grok MVC (message, view, controller) program structure) understand how keyboard and how keyboard and mouse listeners tie in its all pretty straight forward. > browser based was in fact more portable than native code > Yes, I'd well believe that: if your program is talking direct to the browser its organisation needn't be a lot different to a Java GUI program using the MVC structure: - Model contains data storage, input parser, and HTML assembly - Controller handles comms with the web browser - Viewer functions provided by the web browser. -- -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 21:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20210109210537.666d347abc90f6538d60abee@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #25670 |
On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 19:20:21 -0000 (UTC) Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote: > On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 18:33:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > > > Never used java. Runtime is enormous...I know curses. > > > Depends what the program is: Hello World in Java is 419 bytes (the C Of Java Byte Code. > version is 19554 bytes and the source is smaller too (21 lines, 147 chars Of executable code, the Java Byte Code needs a JVM to run it and they tend to be memory hogs IME. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 23:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtddlt$563$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25672 |
On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 21:05:37 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > Of executable code, the Java Byte Code needs a JVM to run it and > they tend to be memory hogs IME. > Its not that bad: everything I've written has run well on 32 bit hardware: in that environment under Linux the limit tends to be the process address space since I never set the swap partition to less that twice physical memory. In that environment the only time I've seen a Java program have memory problems is one of mine that loads potentially very large documents into a PostgreSQL DB. It pulls in a lot of library code too, including JavaMail, Mstor and the JDBC code needed to talk to PostgreSQL. In all cases failures due to running out of memory were the result of exceeding the -Xmm defined memory space, i.e. nothing to do with JVM or code size because every time that happened, the run was successful after I'd increased -Xmm. IIRC that box had around 500MB of RAM. Since moving it to a 64-bit system with 4GB RAM and explicitly setting - xmm in the shell script that launches it I haven't hit and OOM problems with it. This issue is no worse than running a large C++ program with dynamically loaded library code. In fact it might well be better since the JVM uses a JIT compiler to recompile frequently used Java classes to native code and, presumably, discards the P-code as soon as its been replaced by native code. Similarly, a Swing-based roster editor I wrote to support a club I belong to only occupies 1.3 MB of RAM with a little 4777 duty slots assigned: that's the complete roster of weekend duties over a six month season with 14 duty assignments on each rostered day. So, bottom line: I've developed and run fairly substantial Java programs on relatively small Linux boxes and never had issues with running out of memory. -- -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-10 12:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rter97$spf$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25677 |
On 09/01/2021 23:19, Martin Gregorie wrote: > So, bottom line: I've developed and run fairly substantial Java programs > on relatively small Linux boxes and never had issues with running out of > memory. Plenty of code runs out of memory on browsers. In fact the current firefox is so bad it often locks up die to something javascipty -- “it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism (or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans, about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a 'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,' a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian utopia of 1984.” Vaclav Klaus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 16:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1e9kvf13cr3j1v6fcpq1nfokhm3757d46m@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #25670 |
On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 19:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> declaimed the following: >Depends what the program is: Hello World in Java is 419 bytes (the C >version is 19554 bytes and the source is smaller too (21 lines, 147 chars >vs 26 lines, 282 chars) and anyway I like the WORA principle > And how big is the byte-code interpreter/JVM needed to /run/ that Java example? Vs the directly executable C program? -- Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 23:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtdfc9$563$9@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25673 |
On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 16:54:20 -0500, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 19:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie > <martin@mydomain.invalid> declaimed the following: > >>Depends what the program is: Hello World in Java is 419 bytes (the C >>version is 19554 bytes and the source is smaller too (21 lines, 147 >>chars vs 26 lines, 282 chars) and anyway I like the WORA principle >> >> > And how big is the byte-code interpreter/JVM needed to /run/ that Java > example? Vs the directly executable C program? The JVM loadable is 18376 bytes, so not exactly huge, but I don't know how much, if any, dynamically loaded support code it drags in. But note that this is smaller than the hello world program when compiled by the current GCC compiler and statically linked. But, as I said elsewhere a moderate sized graphical Java program (4000 lines of source code, not counting comments) that I wrote using the Swing GUI occupies 1.3 GB after loading a typical working data set (6 6 month- long rosters with 14 rosterable duties per day. However, I should hardly need to remind you that C and C++ programs aren't always exactly economical when it comes to load size: I remember looking at this a long time back when Borland compilers were still a thing. IIRC 'hello world' in ANSI C compiled to several 10s of Kbytes and the C++ version compiled to 800Kb using the then current version of Borland's finest. -- -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-10 02:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5ffa5fd8$0$285$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #25679 |
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
> However, I should hardly need to remind you that C and C++ programs
> aren't always exactly economical when it comes to load size: I remember
> looking at this a long time back when Borland compilers were still a
> thing. IIRC 'hello world' in ANSI C compiled to several 10s of Kbytes and
> the C++ version compiled to 800Kb using the then current version of
> Borland's finest.
pi@dev:~ $ uname -a
Linux dev 5.4.79-v7l+ #1373 SMP Mon Nov 23 13:27:40 GMT 2020 armv7l
GNU/Linux
pi@dev:~ $ gcc --version
gcc (Raspbian 8.3.0-6+rpi1) 8.3.0
pi@dev:~ $ clang --version
clang version 9.0.1-6+rpi1~bpo10+1
pi@dev:~ $ cat hello.c
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
printf("Hello, world.\n");
return 0;
}
pi@dev:~ $ gcc -Os -s hello.c -o hello-gcc-dyn
pi@dev:~ $ gcc -Os -s -static hello.c -o hello-gcc-stat
pi@dev:~ $ clang -Os -s hello.c -o hello-clang-dyn
pi@dev:~ $ clang -Os -s -static hello.c -o hello-clang-stat
pi@dev:~ $ ls -l hello-*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pi pi 5624 jan 10 02:56 hello-clang-dyn
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pi pi 414860 jan 10 02:56 hello-clang-stat
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pi pi 5544 jan 10 02:55 hello-gcc-dyn
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pi pi 414820 jan 10 02:56 hello-gcc-stat
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-09 18:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rtct2j$jem$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25666 |
On 09/01/2021 15:49, Martin Gregorie wrote: > Curses is purest C - it sits on top of the termcap functions and adds > capabilities like pop-up subwindows It also uses y,x coordinates which drives me up the wall! ---druck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi
csiph-web