* Johann Gunnar Oskarsson <johann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Steve Youngs writes:
>> Mostly because I refuse to support Microsuck Windoze in any way,
>> shape, or form. The fact that it is technically crap code and causes
>> more bugs than anything else is just a bonus. :-)
> Well, I'm not going to argue for MS Crap support, but I presume there
> will be a hacker that wants to one day, and I want us to be prepared
> for it. We'll be no better than the current XEmacs team if we just
> shut her out in the cold. This would fall under the general category
> of a new platform support in the PPM (which is yet to be written).
> If no such hacker shows up, then there won't be MS Crap support, final
> ;)
I'll give this hacker until I count to
three... one... two... three... Bzzt! Times up! Right, that settles
it. SXEmacs will NOT support Microsoft in any way!
>> > Of note, the Intel C++ Compiler, icc, is free for open projects
>> > (though only for x86 linux platforms),
>>
>> I don't know much (read: anything) about icc. Is it just a C++
>> compiler or does it do C as well?
>> Please note that I have zero interest in using C++ in SXEmacs.
> Please (also) note that I'm a much stronger C++ hacker than in C or
> even lisp. Are you afraid of C++? Classes? Templates? Or code bloat
> with stuff like exceptions? If it's just code bloat, I'm with you, I
> don't want bloated code for my lovely PS2 with her puny 32 megs of
> ram.
All of who I'd class as good or great C hackers loath C++ with a
passion. I don't mind SXEmacs being compilable with a C++ compiler
because of...
> There has been some work to make XEmacs compile with a C++
> compiler, though I've not tried it myself (yet). Even if the code is
> just C. It is used for stronger type checking and stuff, I think.
...this. But I definitely do not want C++ only code in SXEmacs. I've
got my eye on a couple of truly great C hackers that'd never join if
we went down the C++ road.
>> Oh, how I miss thee, OS/2.
> On a side note, IBM seems to be supporting OS/2 throughout the end of
> this year, at least. (Though you'll probably have to pay for that
> support).
Maybe they'll come out with some IDE drivers that'll actually work
with > 8Gb drives.
IBM has a long history of doing the wrong thing... One of their worst
was dropping OS/2.
>> > We can, though, look at the option to make the kernel a Sexy Macs
>> > Module. Which can lead to chicken and eggs problems when booting,
>> > but that's beside the issue.
>>
>> Hehe. Maybe this could be overcome with a Sexy-Macs bios. :-)
> Or some extensions to grub? :P
Pfft. I will never use grub when there's lilo. :-P
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| In space, |
| No one can hear you rip a stinky |
|------------------------------------<steve@xxxxxxxxxxx>---|
pgpNsA79wTjEt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|