Christmas Gifts

So, Christmas is almost upon us. What are you /prog/rammers going to ask from Santa?

Here's the list I sent to him:

1. Haskell Book
2. Casio Keyboard (So I can play JSB Sebastian Bach)

In addition, I want to learn how to understand Nomads, but I didn't want to get too greedy this Christmas.

1. SICP (Sadly I have no copy :( )
2. Wizard hat and matching wand
3. A metal switch to drill in the back of my pc interrupting the power labeled ``Magic'' and ``More Magic''

I'm asking for the death of the x86 architecture, but I'll settle for a sweet little ARM machine coming into my possession.
(It seems I'll also be giving myself a new x86 PC though, as Bethesda, being faggots, are not releasing Fallout 3 for Linux on ARMv7. They won't even release the source so I can port it myself! Why, I ought to sic a pack of rabid, unwashed RMSes on them.)

I'm saving ``people waking the fuck up and realizing that C++ is a horrible language and if it's really the currently best available choice for whatever the fuck you're doing (it's not), you had better make something better yourself, stat!'' for my birthday.

>>2
LOL

>>3
What is wrong with the x86 architecture?

>>4
Too fucking complex for its own good and shitty design all around.

3. A metal switch to drill in the back of my pc interrupting the power labeled ``Magic'' and ``More Magic''
unless it has only one wire going to it (and still somehow interrupts power when flipped to the the "Magic" setting), you fail it.

>>6
It sure does, if you're properly grounded.

>>3
I think that's the one good thing about ENTERPRISE JAVA BULLSHITE and ENTERPRISE MICROSOFT C# BULLSHITE, it moves people away from C++. I'm not sure that the alternatives are a whole lot better, but at least they're different.

Totally agreed on x86. As for me, I mostly live in the land of PPC and ARM, but my desktop is x86-64 and coincidentally that's what I'm looking at getting replaced for Christmas.

This little beaut: http://acer.com/products/netbook/asone.htm

I'm gonna throw Fedora on that fucker so I can PROGRAM ANYWHERE. Portable Emacs + Firefox + SSH terminal = awesome.

>>9
What color?

#3 in this thread is written by some smug slashdot weenie
I thought you fuckers died in 2002
Shut up

BSD is dead.

>>11
Butthurt Intel engineer. GB2 India.

>>12
Long live OpenBSD.

    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming close on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a cockeyed miracle could save *BSD from its fate at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

>>13
Go lick ESR's hairy asshole

>>15
That makes me a necrophiliac.

:)

>>15
*BSD is alive and well in the internet appliance market -- the various gizmos that sit in front of and manage traffic for major web sites typically run some *BSD variant.

The pleasure of being cummed inside
WE RULE SUPREME!!

You stupid niggers failed to recognize one of the oldest copy-pastas in the book.
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1391352
Suck the diarrhea-pus mixture out of Richard Stallman's infected anal fissures.

In fact, I recently installed FreeBSD on my machine, after using Microsoft Windows OS's all my life. I'm surprised how easy it was to get an X11 window/desktop manager up and running using the Ports collection.

FreeBSD is definitely good for beginners wanting to learn this strange (oh so strange) world of *nix

I want a Fez hat.  'Nuff said.

>>22
You'll need a robe to go with that.

The pleasure of being cummed inside was given to >>1-23!

Every product or service which Franz Inc. offers.

>>1
FAGGOT!!!!!

>>5
Do you mean the architecture or the instruction set?

>>27
When a single assembly-language instruction can be encoded in over a dozen different ways, you know you're doing something wrong.

>>28
Is it really that big a problem? What do you care, anyway?

I want a Haskell compiler that has no Monad support for Christmas.

I don't think anybody ever actually gets work done with Haskell. It's just one prolonged deadpan running gag or meme that's been beaten to the ground.

Prove me wrong, /prog/

>>31
fac n = product [1..n]

fibs = 0: 1: zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs)

loeb f = fmap ($ loeb f) f

Ha! Eat your words, bitch!

>>32
That's all the official tutorial could explain what Haskell is capable of. Computing factorials.
Pure functional languages are the heavy unread coffee table books of the computer programming nerd fag world.

>>33
YHBT

>>34
YHL
HAND

>>29
It is a problem when you want or need a particular encoding. It also means that different assemblers can produce a different result from the same sources, and they'll all be right.

>>36
if you know the machine code you want, why the hell are you using an assembler?

>>37
Why should I have to translate the opcodes when I can have the computer do it for me?

>>38
You don't have to do any translation, the opcodes are printed in the manual.

>>37
Write your own x86 assembler and have it generate only the encodings you like, damn you.

I meant >>36.

I meant >>37, sorry about that.