[9fans] quotefmtinstall

[Charles Forsyth]

In these days of 3 Gbyte memory requirements for browsers, and 1 Gbyte
gnome-panels, should we still insist on quotefmtinstall to ensure %q?

Here's the before & after:
h% size 8.out
19196t + 2388d + 788b = 22372 8.out

h% size 8.out
21915t + 2396d + 788b = 25099 8.out

[l***@proxima.alt.za]

Post by Charles Forsyth
In these days of 3 Gbyte memory requirements for browsers, and 1 Gbyte
gnome-panels, should we still insist on quotefmtinstall to ensure %q?

I'm with you, but it's also a slippery slope...

I do wish we could spend effort in the opposite direction, myself.
Maybe it could be an optional patch, for those of us who get bitten
and have more important things in life than remembering that 8c is not
8g :-)

++L

[erik quanstrom]

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za

Post by Charles Forsyth
In these days of 3 Gbyte memory requirements for browsers, and 1 Gbyte
gnome-panels, should we still insist on quotefmtinstall to ensure %q?

I'm with you, but it's also a slippery slope...
I do wish we could spend effort in the opposite direction, myself.
Maybe it could be an optional patch, for those of us who get bitten
and have more important things in life than remembering that 8c is not
8g :-)

some points.

0. the essence of charles' point is that persistent memory is cheep, and little
fiddly bits are expensive, from a developer's point of view. and by
cheep, we're talking silly cheep. 1kb of disk costs 100 nanodollars. it's the
order of magnitude that's important here, a small integer factor won't
make disks expensive.

1. it can't be optional. this is the sort of thing that got
latter-day unix in so much trouble. if you want your program to
work everywhere (as most people do) you have to program for the
least common denominator, so every program will need
quotefmtinstall(). so there will be a net savings of zero. and
since the problem will now appear on some systems, it will probablly
be harder to remember that you've forgotten to quotefmtinstall.

2. if you want to save overall storage, the print library should ditch
standard support for the rune*print() functions. only 4 programs use
them.

- erik

[l***@proxima.alt.za]

Post by erik quanstrom
0. the essence of charles' point is that persistent memory is cheep, and little
fiddly bits are expensive, from a developer's point of view. and by
cheep, we're talking silly cheep. 1kb of disk costs 100 nanodollars. it's the
order of magnitude that's important here, a small integer factor won't
make disks expensive.

The digital divide, what can I say?

Sadly, I can't buy nanodollars' worth of technology, even though it is
being discarded daily in the western world by the megadollar. Even
the RaspberryPI is beyond reach (we can approach western sponsors for
funding, but that creates a form of slavery that africans are
understandably reluctant to depend on - our leaders don't mind, but
some of us have a social conscience).

I guess I'm asking you and Charles and others to keep that in mind
when you contribute to the conspiracy to make the digital divide
bigger, no matter how small your contribution.

Post by erik quanstrom
1. it can't be optional. this is the sort of thing that got
latter-day unix in so much trouble. if you want your program to
work everywhere (as most people do) you have to program for the
least common denominator, so every program will need
quotefmtinstall(). so there will be a net savings of zero. and
since the problem will now appear on some systems, it will probablly
be harder to remember that you've forgotten to quotefmtinstall.
2. if you want to save overall storage, the print library should ditch
standard support for the rune*print() functions. only 4 programs use
them.

I understand the technological issues more or less well enough. But
where I stand, I can't ignore the social implications of consuming
resources as soon as they become available. I can think of a penalty
that could be paid by inefficient consumers, but in a world where
survival of the fittest is the guiding civilising principle, I am
geographically an endangered species.

++L

PS: Your "if you want your program to work everywhere (as most people
do)" is spurious. Why are we programming for anything but MS Windows,
if that is the case?

[erik quanstrom]

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za
Sadly, I can't buy nanodollars' worth of technology, even though it is
being discarded daily in the western world by the megadollar. Even
the RaspberryPI is beyond reach

if you don't have the money for a raspberry pi, then you can't afford
anything that will boot plan 9. so arguing that adding 1.7% (maybe)
to the size of /bin is an argument for the moot court. and in that
moot court, one could argue that stripping the executables would save
much more than 1.7%.

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za
(we can approach western sponsors for
funding, but that creates a form of slavery that africans are
understandably reluctant to depend on - our leaders don't mind, but
some of us have a social conscience).

i don't know what slavery has got to do with anything.
and i find the comparison to such a horrible crime distasteful.

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za
I understand the technological issues more or less well enough. But
where I stand, I can't ignore the social implications of consuming
resources as soon as they become available. I can think of a penalty

since this isn't a social justice list, i'll just address the techncal
assertion.

it is untrue that consuming an extra 3121 bytes
of storage per executable is consuming resources at the leading edge.
sd storage is sold in big chunks. the smallest sd card i can find is
256mb. a 1gb sd card is roughly the same price. (and please no quibbling.
we've already established that the pi itself is too expensive)
you will probablly need a 1gb card, as the image alone is nearly 500mb.

- erik

[hiro]

hu? you can get x86s thrown after you for free. including the crt
monitor and dirty model m keyboard. even a three button mouse might be
there if you search the trash properly.
no comparison with pi plus power adapter plus usb mouse and keyboard
plus case plus hdmi plus tv
also thinkpads are dead cheap and you dont even have to look for a 3
button mouse

Post by erik quanstrom

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za
Sadly, I can't buy nanodollars' worth of technology, even though it is
being discarded daily in the western world by the megadollar. Even
the RaspberryPI is beyond reach

if you don't have the money for a raspberry pi, then you can't afford
anything that will boot plan 9. so arguing that adding 1.7% (maybe)
to the size of /bin is an argument for the moot court. and in that
moot court, one could argue that stripping the executables would save
much more than 1.7%.

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za
(we can approach western sponsors for
funding, but that creates a form of slavery that africans are
understandably reluctant to depend on - our leaders don't mind, but
some of us have a social conscience).

i don't know what slavery has got to do with anything.
and i find the comparison to such a horrible crime distasteful.

Post by l***@proxima.alt.za
I understand the technological issues more or less well enough. But
where I stand, I can't ignore the social implications of consuming
resources as soon as they become available. I can think of a penalty

since this isn't a social justice list, i'll just address the techncal
assertion.
it is untrue that consuming an extra 3121 bytes
of storage per executable is consuming resources at the leading edge.
sd storage is sold in big chunks. the smallest sd card i can find is
256mb. a 1gb sd card is roughly the same price. (and please no quibbling.
we've already established that the pi itself is too expensive)
you will probablly need a 1gb card, as the image alone is nearly 500mb.
- erik