migrating to mediawiki
water at tunes.org
Wed Oct 19 11:24:34 PDT 2005
On Oct 19, 2005, at 8:49 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 04:13:32PM -0700, Brian Rice wrote:
>>> Is there a volunteer for (2), or at least for (1)? If not, I'll
>>> do it,
>>> but it might take more time.
>> Start up a new instance of mediawiki now, fully lock down the CLiki,
>> and hand out a pointer to it. The alternative is to ask the CL
>> community to re-implement the features.
>> No one here on this mailing list is willing to code, I'll wager.
>> We've spent too long not making (TUNES) software that it's a bit
>> silly to ask now.
> I've been working on a threaded-code interpreter that may satisfy
> some of the needs of the TUENS project. It's not FORTH, it's strongly
> typed, it's garbage-collected, and it's barely reaching the pre-
> alpha stage.
> It is designed so that it *could* have its innards replaced by
> that generates efficient, optimised machine-code without doing much to
> the programs run on it.
> Unlike the discussions that took place years and years ago on one
> of the TUNES forums, it type-marks the integers instead of the
> I haven't decided on a license yet -- it might be proprietary,
> might not,
> might be somewhere in-between.
> But there is at least one person writing something that might turn out
> to be TUNES-related software.
> But if I start maintaining a wiki, I will probably have no time left
> for any programming progress.
> -- hendrik
But does your software really matter when there is Factor? http://
Why not just merge with Factor and take the saved development time to
do more interesting things?
Most TUNES members really do not follow what is actually going on in
the wide world of computer science. That's worthless for this
project, since the point is to provide a common convergence goal. The
lone-wolf TUNES implementor is a FOOL.
More information about the TUNES