* BC (following up Bit X, Fair Pay, Low Jitter etc)
@ 2025-02-17 11:32 Ywe Cærlyn
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Ywe Cærlyn @ 2025-02-17 11:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Men and Demons.
I have thought some about programming language.
I think some functions could be hardware accelerated, and more
instructions could be used. for low jitter (more pr. clock and bandwith
potential).
(RISC is counterintuitive to high-level paradigms).
BC would be somewhere between B and C and suit this.
C++ simly seems vain, and I think it is academic to know the correct
developments here, and be with it.
Such as for instance XFS, seems symbolcorrect, very little complaints on
this, and should be used.
BC also is symbolcorrect for programming. Unix was indeed based on BCPL,
which again is based on Bit, and binary logic.
Bit also is symbolcorrect for an optimal inner loop. (including context
switches etc).
X is good for userinterface, and APIs.
Light.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2025-02-17 11:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-02-17 11:32 BC (following up Bit X, Fair Pay, Low Jitter etc) Ywe Cærlyn
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®