Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: Different? vs VSCode? (Score 1) 29

Maybe I misunderstood what you meant, but Zed is not atom-based. VSCode and other editors based on it have direct Atom ascendancy, however in the case of Zed is mostly in the developer team, and thus many concepts about what an editor should be are similar or evolved from those in Atom.

Comment Re: Doesn't run on Windows yet (Score 1) 29

Many IDEa are slow because they are 1) written in Java and/or 2) they integrate the debugging information in the editing structures in a suboptimal way and/or 3) they have a heavy user interface and/or 4) the internal data structures of the editor are badly conceived to start with.

A lot of programmers that understand debugging have limited understanding of text editing, and so on. Understanding of efficient algorithms is today less widespread than it used many years ago, even though we know a lot more of very efficient algorithms, esp. heuristic ones.

I used IDEs capable of debugging and interactive code manipulation on a Mac 30+ years ago. And they were relatively snappy. There is no reason they should not be extremely snappy today, except library and UI bloat, which often happens today in almost every piece of SW.

Integrating gdb-like functionality in an editor like Zed should not be too difficult. In fact, an interface over gdb should be easy to code, but they have limited time and resources (mostly human).

Comment Re:Doesn't run on Windows yet (Score 2) 29

To me it speaks that it manages to be sleek, fast, have an uncluttered look, and not relying on humongous things like Electron.
Also, there i actual research on the data structures behind the scenes. I helped a bit optimize the choice of memory allocator and parameters for the lengths of the ropes. It can load very large files almost instantaneously.

It has a few rough edges and some features are incomplete, but it has enormous promise. The windows version is coming out soon.

Comment Re:Shit hi-fi (Score 1) 208

Warning: curmudgeonly old guy rant. Feel free to mod down.

I would go so far as to say almost all consumer sound products are crap today and not just Apple. You can still get quality equipment that delivers great audio but most music is consumed through mobile devices over bluetooth and the end result is dreck to my ears.

I believe that almost all consumer sound products have always been crap. The main difference is that today you can get also extremely good equipment at fair prices, be it some second hand classic vintage stuff or some modern DAC (sub 1K$, based on Sabre, CS, Rohm or AKM chips) an essentially perfect amplifiers that have no audible distortion, noise and frequency variations and that can drive almost any speaker around (for instance the NCore or Purifi offers). So the situation today is actually better, even though the snake oil vendors are trying to tell you you need a 500pound turntable, a set of D'Agostino amps driving Wilson Chromosomic speakers.

Comment Re:Mixed machines (Score 1) 21

I'm in agreement with you - but you do at least have the option of disabling system integrity protection, which removes the constraints you mention.

(On Intel Macs, anyway - not sure about M1/M2)

You can indeed disable SIP also on an Apple Silicon Mac. I know because I did it to let SwitchResX add new resolutions to my MacBook Air's display.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 114

A weirdly larger percentage of developers use Macs than probably should.

When Apple switched to x86 processors you could get one machine that ran all 3 major operating systems, doesn't seem weird to me.

And with the new machines you can get one machine that can run all 3 major operating systems, on "both" architectures!

Comment Re:Subsidizing the industries of the past (Score 4, Interesting) 124

RISC-V can't be taken seriously as a successor to ARM.

Sure it can. RISC-V and ARM are 2 architectures that essentially do the same thing. And thus are interchangeable. No fundamental reason one couldn't take an ARM based SoC, replace the ARM part with a RISC-V part, and use the resulting SoC for same application(s) as before.

Well, no. The ARM architecture (and IP) defines a ton of aspects of the architecture, in particular how the cores interact with the Caches, the interconnect, and the peripherals. Whereas several components can be adapted to work with different architectures, and some are connected through industry standard interconnects (such as PCIe), many other components need to talk to each other using a specific set of protocols. The ARM Architecture is not just a ISA, it is a complete Architecture. So, by taking out ARM cores from an ARM-based SoC and replacing it with something different would result in IP infringement. There is a ton of work going into architecting several aspects of the complete architecture - in fact more work than "just" the ISA. RISC-V is at the moment not much more than a set of ISAs.

Slashdot Top Deals

One possible reason that things aren't going according to plan is that there never was a plan in the first place.

Working...