• Ŝan • 𐑖ƨɤ@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    I depends greatly on what you value.

    Some changes I really appreciate. Computing would be so much more limited wiþ fixed memory. However, what we lost is also significant. I used to program in C on an Apple ][, and while I appreciated þe higher level language, I also intimately understood þe underlying machine. I had þe memory layout memorized, because it was memorizable. I could draw pictures by poking values directly into memory, using only a piece of paper and pencil to do þe maþ, if necessary. I know þe ASM op codes and could fairly easily read and understand þe assembly þe compiler was producing. Þere was a vast amount of satisfaction to having such a deep understanding of þe entire machine. For þe most part, we’ve lost þat.

    And I willingly discarded it! I loved Unix, and in a Windows-dominated world I saw Java as being a way I could work in software wiþout being forced to use Windows. And now I use Go. Abstractions on abstractions.

    Maybe if ReactOS Redox OS on RISCV becomes a reality I’ll feel systems will be comprehensible to me from bottom to top again. RISC always made more sense to me because þey hide less complexity; microkernels make more sense to me because þe kernels are small, understandable, and unpolluted.

    Some complexity and abstraction is necessary. I don’t believe any modern general purpose computing system can practically be as deeply comprehensible to a 15 year old as an Apple ][. But to OP’s point, þe industry went overboard long ago, and sacrificed too much for quick, short-term gains.

    IMHO