UNIXgod

I don't know who was the (car 'hacker) but this one was the last in the recursive tail call:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1DFwtR755I

I actually thought that the new feature of def yielding the symbolic name of the newly defined function was interesting, if for anything to open up new areas where there was a limit before on building lookup tables for macro and meta programming techniques with either DSL creation and|or basic ruby hacking for fun.

2.1.0p0 :001 > x = def foo() puts "hello"; end

=> :foo

2.1.0p0 :002 > def eval_it_now_bitch! lulz

2.1.0p0 :003?> eval lulz.to_s

2.1.0p0 :004?> end

=> :eval_it_now_bitch!

2.1.0p0 :005 > eval_it_now_bitch! x

hello

=> nil

It really shouldn't have been downvoted.

The parent is spot on. Bell Labs was the first to leave the Multics project.

It took several years for Thompson, Ritchie, McIlroy and Ossanna to get funding.

They did it under the radar with a PDP-7 garbage picked by Thompson while sending letter after letter to get funding for a DEC PDP-10 or Sigma7 which they would use to create the OS and play games/simulations (i.e. Space Travel). Mind you computer time in the late 60's was upwards to $75 and hour.

After all is said and done Bell Labs at the time was a government regulated national telecommunications monopoly and was not allowed to sell it. They could licenses it though and did. Berkeley only had to pay for the tapes since they where a school.

FWIW they didn't get the funding based on asking to program an unspecified OS but to create system specifically designed for editing and formatting text. The big buzzword back then was "word processing". Also the higher ups already knew by then that they had something which Ken and Dennis had done on their own. AT&T bought them a PDP-11 and the first end user applications where for AT&T patent dept. to be used by secretaries.

Thus, during 1969, we began trying to find an alternative to Multics. The search took several forms. Throughout 1969 we (mainly Ossanna, Thompson, Ritchie) lobbied intensively for the purchase of a medium-scale machine for which we promised to write an operating system; the machines we suggested were the DEC PDP-10 and the SDS (later Xerox) Sigma 7. The effort was frustrating, because our proposals were never clearly and finally turned down, but yet were certainly never accepted. Several times it seemed we were very near success. The final blow to this effort came when we presented an exquisitely complicated proposal, designed to minimize financial outlay, that involved some outright purchase, some third-party lease, and a plan to turn in a DEC KA-10 processor on the soon-to-be-announced and more capable KI-10. The proposal was rejected, and rumor soon had it that W. O. Baker (then vice-president of Research) had reacted to it with the comment `Bell Laboratories just doesn't do business this way!' --Ritchie 1979 http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/hist.html

Towards the end of the 80's Berkeley students took a nod from Richard Stallman and put their distribution on the net (which was mostly rewritten at that point (It was Keith Bostic who proposed removal of non-AT&T code)).

ATT UNIX was licensed at about $200k while the BSD patchset was just a piece of software you added if for anything the TCP/IP stack, vi, job control, curses, mail services and csh.

I don't for a minute believe that Google or ATT are in any way for the greater good of society and research any more than I would believe that apple or microsoft care about education and/or removing vender lock-in. It's not like any of the aforementioned monopolies have invested in real problems like cancer research and/or a cure.

If you want to explore the innovators it's best to look at the McIlroys, Thompsons and Ritchies, Bostics and Stallmans and so fourth who really did innovate and change our lives for the better.

Having control makes me happy/sane. Having unicode set to (on|off) does not affect either diff/patch.

It's historical and sets your local character set. The default value on FreeBSD is POSIX which is an alias the historically value which is C. Desktop unix's like OSX or ubuntu set it to utf8.

Another note is that this is triggering fgrep which is already fast due to it's fixed length expression (i.e. no recursion is involved)

ahh yes, real programmers twiddle bits on their hard drive with a nothing more than a tiny magnet:

http://www.cs.utah.edu/~elb/folklore/mel.html

zombie? UDP? DDoZ botnet?

Definitely meant it's ROFL web scale, asynchronous, non-blocking, event driven, message passing, nosql, sharded, clusters of highly available, reliable, high performance, real time, bad ass, rockstar, get the girls, get the funding, get the IPO, impress your mom, impress your cat ... applications.

It's a tool which is used by engineers, computer scientists and researchers. Focusing on your question for the /practical/ meaning of 'it's not linux...' outside what I explained in a previous comment that it's Berkeley UNIX unencumbered, though we do have the "one true awk"; Another diff would be that it's not a pure clean room implementation like the GNU operating system. BSD is over 35 years old and served us all well.

If you haven't had an opportunity to explore FreeBSD it's worthy to explore your options and toolsets if for any reason to be a well rounded hacker and also to understand the freedom and choices you have to make your own educated decision on the tools which you find practical for your own purposes.

Been able to run java on FreeBSD as long as I can remember. Maybe this link will help you: http://www.freebsd.org/java/

This on AMD chips as well? Since it's BSD we can just have an option to turn it off.

Yeah. Sort of like the Wesley Willis of the hacking culture.

It's Berkeley UNIX without AT&T encumbered code. It's common in environments that have real hardware and it's used for secure and stable servers. I've used it for upwards to 15 years if you have more questions I can attempt to help you.

Actually Stallman placed preference on Lisp and C as being his preferred languages.

The quote your referring to is part of his statement exposing the imbalance of the the educational system within the US in the 80's. Here is the quote which also came from the first announcement to his emacs editor under the tag /Blue Sky/:

When large numbers of nontechnical workers are using a programmable editor, they will he tempted constantly to begin programming in the course of their day-to-day lives. This should contribute greatly to computer literacy, especially because many of the people thus exposed will be secretaries taught by society that they are incapable of doing mathematics, and unable to imagine for a moment that they can learn to program. But that won't stop them from learning it if they don't know that it is programming that they are learning!

FWIW you can run AmigaOS on pre-intel based macs:

http://www.morphos-team.net/intro

UNIX scales very well. This is coming from someone who programs in regular expressions. Nothing wrong with not using bash, or ruby|python|perl when everything can be done in the small one. The posix sh has a 70k footprint. There is nothing that can't be accomplished in the shell with both less code while defeating complexity through both recursion and stream processing. They hit it spot on with the philosophy and operating system semantics. It's just another way of using it.

It's very much the inverse of making a statement like /replacing all domain specific languages with bike shed driven development/ would be a bad thing™

No it's just BSD UNIX proper.

quoted from: http://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/

"the logical continuation of the FreeBSD 4.x series"

It's a classic. I posted Chaos vs Order

This is a classic piece we generally give hackers new to FreeBSD: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/08

Something to consider, which I should point out because your new, is that without BSD you wouldn't have OSX. There's a little BSD in everything (even windows). Another worthy article you should definitely read which explains that BSD is the The single Greatest Piece of Software Ever, with the broadest impact on the world, was BSD

http://www.informationweek.com/whats-the-greatest-software-e...?

Maybe with fuse. No one has ported it too FreeBSD either which is to bad because having choices is a good thing™

It looks like a late 10 years birthday. Your not wrong for bringing it up so don't worry for being /that guy/

I've programmed posix sh (Kenneth Almquist's shell ash) for years. Bash is like a poor implementation of korn. For large programs /(k|z)?sh/ or simply using perl or ruby where it makes sense. Nothing beats writing system with not much more than sed, head, tail, wc, tr, sort, uniq, grep and occasionally awk. No reason to create dependencies where none are needed.

It was zsh emulating csh. they messed up by not using the almquist shell like the other BSDs.

I love this! Thank you for linking it up. This also how to do a talk proper.

Ahh the famous halting problem and it's recursive work around for unrealistic deadlines where one simply says 'fuckit;'

I noticed that as well and assumed it was a spammed linkbait. This was a great read btw.

I'm interested in creating my own scheme interpreter and I've used /n?(vi)|m?|(e(x|d))/ for many years. For any external script the end user can stream back the transform simply by using the bang operator. How would I go about calling one of my scripts in vimscript so I could create named macros without the bang operator? Is there a library function which I can create a small system wrapper to call any language on the system to extend it without bang?