Well, most interpreters use a compiler internally, for example to compile to byte code. The book explains that as well, so I'd recommend just reading it: https://craftinginterpreters.com/a-map-of-the-territory.html...

Thanks.

https://till.red/ :)

Tere, Specific Advice seems down (but nice to see the Bunny error) ~ A Wiser

Thanks, will fix! Haven't maintaineed the website in a bit :)

Very cool! Why was and the entire networking stack straight forward, but not HTTP (and TCP)? Could you take inspiration form other projects for things like DNS?

Up to TCP most protocols are very straight forward, atleast getting them to work semi reliable. But then TCP explodes in complexity with all the state management and possible paths a connection can take.

HTTP is mostly annoying because of all the text parsing :D

Yeah...HTTP/1 is one of those weird cases where the older protocol is considerably more difficult to implement correctly than the newer ""more complex"" standard. This is especially true if you want your server to work with they myriad of questionably compliant clients out in the world.

HTTP/3 might have been easier, and using QUIC+HTTP/3 in your hobby OS is a fun flex :)

httpdito http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/server.s implements HTTP/1.0 GET in about 320 machine instructions, and I haven't yet found a questionably compliant client that doesn't work with it. Writeup in http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/httpdito-readme.

I don’t think that http/3 is easier to implement than http/1.1 especially since h3 is stateful where http/1.1 is not. Especially not when everything should be working correctly and securely because the spec does not always tell about these things. Oh and multiplexing is quite a hard thing to do especially when you are also dealing with a state machine and each of your clients can be malicious.

I can't speak to http/3 (I haven't tried to impl it), but I can say that a bare-bones http/2 is very easy to implement because it doesn't try to pretend to be prose.

Interesting! The article talks mostly about how this all worked, but rarely about what was actually discussed. Which opinions of the party do you like or support?

Thanks for the question!

I’d prefer not to dive into policy positions here — the main focus of my post was the product-building process and what it was like to work behind the scenes.

You write:

> I want to see what it would look like if someone like this had more power and responsibility.

You were attracted to his campaign because of his policy positions, which most people see as dangerous and offensive.

He won't answer this because he knows it's abhorrent...

> one door per day until it's Christmas eve

That would be 24.

You also open one on Christmas. Some people consider Christmas more important than Christmas eve.

https://www.hallmark.com/house-and-home/figurines/precious-m...

That really depends on which country you're in.

What?

I think there must be some misunderstanding? I think deathanatos just wants an easy way to send files between computers when the internet is down, which seems decently reasonable.

Oh, I won't, but MS has the unfortunate recurring habit of turning features on against users' will, at best giving the option to "Remind me in 3 days".

Or the old "oops we installed an upgrade and accidentally flipped your setting by on purpose not having QA"

I don't know how many times I've had to tell Windows that I don't want Edge to be my default browser and OneDrive should not open at login.

My "favorite" tactless Windows update story in recent memory was when an update pinned a Copilot link to my taskbar. I unpinned it, then a few weeks later another update added the Copilot link back to my taskbar, but not as a pinned app. Rather it replaced the god damn "show desktop" button in the bottom right of the screen! They replaced an always on-screen OS navigation button that's been there since Windows 7 with an ad!!

I hope to god that Valve takes the opportunity they have with Steam OS to give us a potential real alternative to Windows that focuses on gaming support. Cause that's literally the only reason I'm forced to continue using this Microsoft adware slop of an OS.

> They replaced an always on-screen OS navigation button that's been there since Windows 7 with an ad!!

That must be doing wonders for the click rate. I can see the pre-promotion powerpoint slide now: "User engagement with Copilot is showing exponential growth"

Promotions all around! Line goes up and all it cost was continuing to make even more of our customers hate our product and our company!

Better yet, how about not making visual keylogger code part of the OS to begin with.

I’d be pretty nervous about running Windows with this even able to be enabled.

No way the benefit:risk ratio makes the slightest sense in this case.

This “feature” was made for corporate owned window machines, who will force it enabled via policies.

Exactly, and I think that the real goal is for enterprises (and MS itself) to collect training data for Computer Use AI agents.

There is currently no policy setting to do this. The available policy settings are "disable Recall and do not allow users to enable it" (which is the default) and "allow users to enable Recall, but leave it disabled by default".

Any comparison to Typst?

Unless you modify Redis, what do you want to share? You don't have to share any of your server code or anything. No reason to be so dramatic. :)

You have to make the choice about sharing at the start. If you use AGPL and later decide to make changes, you'll have to share. So most don't want to risk it.

But more important, AGPL software is banned at many large corporations. It's simply not an option.

Or you could use C# and get all of those features.