But it's an easy jump to the real thing from there.
The driver issues that are commonly complained about will make that difficulty depend on what hardware you have.
Readit Newsuserbinator commented on RFC 3092 – Etymology of "Foo" (2001) datatracker.ietf.org/doc/... · Posted by u/ipnon
Not to be confused with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmoo , although I have used that as a metasyntactic variable before.
userbinator commented on Reverse Engineering the Prom for the SGI O2 mattst88.com/blog/2026/02... · Posted by u/mattst88
In the PC world this would be known as "BIOS modding".
The first two instructions looked legitimate, but the third looked unlikely to be a real instruction.
Given that the first appears to be a branch, that's not surprising. When disassembling, not following the flow will likely not give you anything meaningful. If the author is reading this: have you tried Ghidra?
That said, this seems a lot simpler than PC BIOSes in structure, as the latter are usually written in a combination of C and Asm (I can see why no one wanted to write MIPS Asm) and are self-extracting compressed archives.
They don't care, they would rather let you use pirated MS software than move to Linux.
Not even sure that's true anymore. How else to explain WSL/WSL2? They practically lead you to Linux by the hand these days.
Even with that, your hardware is still running Windows.
userbinator commented on SectorC: A C Compiler in 512 bytes (2023) xorvoid.com/sectorc.html... · Posted by u/valyala
> but it seems there are others here who don't want to speak of the truth
Or you know, just didn't get hung up on the blatantly obvious thing not being explicitly disclaimed right in the title, only in the preamble?
Not telling the whole truth, little-by-little, this is how honesty crumbles.
userbinator commented on SectorC: A C Compiler in 512 bytes (2023) xorvoid.com/sectorc.html... · Posted by u/valyala
Why is your visceral reaction is to frame it as a quest for truth versus a great suppression of truth? Everything alright up there?
Literal second sentence in the article, in case it wasn't incredibly obvious to people anyways:
> It supports a subset of C that is large enough to write real and interesting programs.
I'm all for more boring headlines, but this characterization is ridiculous.
I've had enough of headlines that overpromise and underdeliver. It's essentially false advertising. It's not like the word "subset" would put it over the length limit.
I’m my experience, unwavering Windows folk are simply power users who find *nix shells burdensome.
I've been mostly using Windows for the past few decades, but that's mainly because of the GUI; I think *nix shells are awesome compared to COMMAND.COM/CMD.EXE.
(As for PowersHell... yuck. It's like MS decided to reinvent bash but in the most bureaucratic and obfuscated way they could.)
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
Seeing "== false" and variations thereof always triggers the suspicion that its author doesn't fully understand boolean expressions. I have once seen the even worse "(x == false) == true".