From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0DFA1381F4 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:43:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 31232E062B; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:43:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F366521C01E for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:41:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id hq12so1324320wib.4 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:41:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=27VojA+Bg6Y6z2GmoR8y2JWnnZbfWmu6uoetdfp+igU=; b=FVGWLd3rj34v8XBsc5lZuffHUqhpIWAmQvLkzWrYiW3NJIjvn92X4ZxrIN67EY25tN 5r6I6o6oJUYPorYaSqvca/IG3AnVz1J1KG4reVtXeY7ds/t2hAG1/CX+wvm1gE/mOA6r onxq3kAPWCfa7KiLBITcyC+fP9a4ulGb/TutVPS6LNeW8SQh1bdcWvG0HTJUKs3VkQUz PfcR5Z5xgvEe9hkDblwnURgdkF2IIenaJ2bH7M1x+gax8v3oKmqpyZBvTwgOQOfcq+Em S23X7MU/kgOrJ/H1AE8TwQvigExkI0oxZ4qW0UVuFwD4+nNNwX4FlS6sxinfCFere2wG 9d2w== Received: by 10.180.102.6 with SMTP id fk6mr12793544wib.9.1355168510651; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:41:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from khamul.example.com (196-215-209-117.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.215.209.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h19sm11394099wiv.7.2012.12.10.11.41.48 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:41:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 21:38:26 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: {OT} Will ARM take over the world? Message-ID: <20121210213826.7b3b411d@khamul.example.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1372428.YfDgYWYQ2y@localhost> Organization: Internet Solutions X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 9fd52e13-a3f2-4cd9-a0d4-d9d16b8f4d15 X-Archives-Hash: 8baa938a1676cdb24cebca3cb4ccd5c8 On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:06:36 +0000 (UTC) Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2012-12-10, Volker Armin Hemmann > wrote: > > Am Samstag, 8. Dezember 2012, 19:25:55 schrieb Grant: > > > >> It seems like ARM processors will destroy x86 before too long. > >> Does anyone think this won't happen? > > > > no > > > > two reasons: > > > > not enough power > > does not run x86 software > > > > the second one is a real deal breaker. > > Only until somebody invents some sort of scheme where you can write a > program using a source language that isn't tied directly to the > processor architecture. Then you'd be able to build programs (or even > OS kernels) so that they'd run on a variety of CPU architectures! > We can do that *already* java perl python dotnet and any number of other languages compiled to bytecode. There's too many to list. Why have these languages not taken over the world seeing as they all a) exist b) exist now c) run now d) do what it says on the box e) run about as fast as C most of the time in places where it matters? Because in theory they do what they do well. In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is a difference between theory and practice -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com