size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
That's a remarkable assertion.
I presume you're asserting that you can do this *and* the code will
execute correctly.
Are you saying that that's possible in your current implementation, or
that it's something you intend to implement in the future?
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
If the latter, how does it know whether
size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wibbled:
size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
Interesting, I didn't know C would return 4 (just tested it, it does). I could understand it if it was in double quotes and so was a pointer but
what is the logic behind returning 4 for an explicit single byte character?
On 12/02/2025 09:12, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wibbled:
size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
Interesting, I didn't know C would return 4 (just tested it, it does). I
could understand it if it was in double quotes and so was a pointer but
what is the logic behind returning 4 for an explicit single byte character? >>
Character constants, like 'a', were found in the earliest days of C when >everything that was a number was "int". So character constants, like
all other C constants, were "int". This has remained unchanged -
backwards compatibility is of huge importance in C.
When C++ was young, the aim was to keep close compatibility with C when
it did not interfere with other goals of the language. Having 'a' be of
type "char", rather than "int", was important to C++ which now had >overloading.
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:53:05 +0100
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wibbled:
On 12/02/2025 09:12, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wibbled:
size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
Interesting, I didn't know C would return 4 (just tested it, it does). I >>> could understand it if it was in double quotes and so was a pointer but
what is the logic behind returning 4 for an explicit single byte character? >>>
Character constants, like 'a', were found in the earliest days of C when
everything that was a number was "int". So character constants, like
all other C constants, were "int". This has remained unchanged -
backwards compatibility is of huge importance in C.
When C++ was young, the aim was to keep close compatibility with C when
it did not interfere with other goals of the language. Having 'a' be of
type "char", rather than "int", was important to C++ which now had
overloading.
Interesting. Fairly academic I suppose because I can't imagine any scenario in a C program where you'd so sizeof on a char literal instead of just hard coding a 1 though it could be a one way for the code to know if it had been compiled by a C or C++ compiler.
On 2/12/25 4:55 AM, David Brown wrote:
On 12/02/2025 00:46, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
That's a remarkable assertion.
I presume you're asserting that you can do this *and* the code will
execute correctly.
Are you saying that that's possible in your current implementation, or
that it's something you intend to implement in the future?
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
If the latter, how does it know whether
    size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
I would assume that there must be some way to switch languages within
the file, and tell the compiler what you are doing. Otherwise a switch
between C and C++ is a pretty minor affair compared to a switch between,
say, Cobol and Haskell. Maybe the OP could give us some more detail.
Maybe it uses the source file extension to determine which language to
code against? I know that "technically" .c vs .cpp don't actually mean >anything to a compiler but it's possible that "neos" would use that to >determine it? Just a guess.
On 12/02/2025 00:46, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
That's a remarkable assertion.
I presume you're asserting that you can do this *and* the code will
execute correctly.
Are you saying that that's possible in your current implementation, or
that it's something you intend to implement in the future?
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
If the latter, how does it know whether
    size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
I would assume that there must be some way to switch languages within
the file, and tell the compiler what you are doing. Otherwise a switch between C and C++ is a pretty minor affair compared to a switch between,
say, Cobol and Haskell. Maybe the OP could give us some more detail.
On 2/12/25 4:55 AM, David Brown wrote:...
On 12/02/2025 00:46, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
...Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
...Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
...I would assume that there must be some way to switch languages within
the file, and tell the compiler what you are doing. Otherwise a switch
Maybe it uses the source file extension to determine which language to
code against? I know that "technically" .c vs .cpp don't actually mean anything to a compiler but it's possible that "neos" would use that to determine it? Just a guess.
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
That's a remarkable assertion.
I presume you're asserting that you can do this *and* the code will
execute correctly.
Are you saying that that's possible in your current implementation, or
that it's something you intend to implement in the future?
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
If the latter, how does it know whether
size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)?
Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> writes:
On 2/12/25 4:55 AM, David Brown wrote:
On 12/02/2025 00:46, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
That's a remarkable assertion.
I presume you're asserting that you can do this *and* the code will
execute correctly.
Are you saying that that's possible in your current implementation, or >>>> that it's something you intend to implement in the future?
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
If the latter, how does it know whether
    size_t s = sizeof 'a';
is C (typically setting s to 4, sizeof (int)) or C++ (setting s to 1)? >>>>
I would assume that there must be some way to switch languages within
the file, and tell the compiler what you are doing. Otherwise a switch >>> between C and C++ is a pretty minor affair compared to a switch between, >>> say, Cobol and Haskell. Maybe the OP could give us some more detail.
Maybe it uses the source file extension to determine which language to
code against? I know that "technically" .c vs .cpp don't actually mean >>anything to a compiler but it's possible that "neos" would use that to >>determine it? Just a guess.
A cobol compiler I once used had the ENTER SYMBOLIC verb to allow
embedded assembler in the COBOL source file; a similar construct
could be extended to support mixing any language.
The difficulties in matching semantics and data layout between
the different supported grammars would seem nigh insurmountable.
On 2/12/25 11:36, Phillip wrote:
On 2/12/25 4:55 AM, David Brown wrote:...
On 12/02/2025 00:46, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
...Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
...Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
...I would assume that there must be some way to switch languages within
the file, and tell the compiler what you are doing. Otherwise a switch
Maybe it uses the source file extension to determine which language to
code against? I know that "technically" .c vs .cpp don't actually mean
anything to a compiler but it's possible that "neos" would use that to
determine it? Just a guess.
How would the file extension help with changes in the programming
language that occur within a single source code file?
On 2/12/25 12:26 PM, James Kuyper wrote:...
On 2/12/25 11:36, Phillip wrote:
On 2/12/25 4:55 AM, David Brown wrote:...
On 12/02/2025 00:46, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
How would the file extension help with changes in the programming
language that occur within a single source code file?
Maybe I missed something. Is dev claiming you can write code from
different languages in the same file?
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:...
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
In 1.0 a marker will be used.
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
In 1.0 a marker will be used.
How would that work? If you use a fixed marker, it would have to be
something that wasn't a valid piece of program text in any of the
supported languages. But if yours is to be a universal compiler, that
becomes an impossible decision - every possible marker is valid program
text in as least one of the supported languages.
The obvious solution is to use different markers for different languages
- but that would still run afoul of any language that didn't have any
invalid program texts.
How universal do you really want your compiler to be? Take a look at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_programming_language>. How many
of them could neos handle? Most of the languages described there are
just elaborate jokes of one kind or another - but as such they provide
useful test cases for anything intended to be a truly universal
compiler. Any feature of one of those esoteric programming languages
that would make it hard to handle is something that might come up in a non-joke language.
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
In 1.0 a marker will be used.
How would that work? If you use a fixed marker, it would have to be
something that wasn't a valid piece of program text in any of the
supported languages. But if yours is to be a universal compiler, that
becomes an impossible decision - every possible marker is valid program
text in as least one of the supported languages.
The obvious solution is to use different markers for different languages
- but that would still run afoul of any language that didn't have any
invalid program texts.
How universal do you really want your compiler to be? Take a look at
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_programming_language>. How many
of them could neos handle? Most of the languages described there are
just elaborate jokes of one kind or another - but as such they provide
useful test cases for anything intended to be a truly universal
compiler. Any feature of one of those esoteric programming languages
that would make it hard to handle is something that might come up in a
non-joke language.
If it were me that was designing this concept, I'd pick some syntax that >would be very unlikely to come up in real code - even if it might be
valid syntax in one or more languages.
For example, decide that the sequence "#¤§" at the start of a line is a
"neos meta-escape". How likely is it that those characters might form
part of a normal valid line in some programming language? It's rather >unlikely. The same goes for something longer but less cryptic, such as >"##NEOS##".
It does mean that people who use Neos and mix different languages in the
same file might have an restriction on the code they can use - but it is >merely a hypothetical restriction.
You could also have a requirement that mixed-language files need to be >compiled in "neos" mode (rather than C mode, or Pascal mode, or
whatever). They then start off in "neos meta-escape" mode, and as well
as allowing the choice of language (and perhaps standard version, flags, >etc.) this could also have a command to change the "neos meta-escape" >sequence. So for those that wanted to use "#¤§" as a new operator in
Forth, their first line of the file could be :
#¤§ NEOS-META-ESCAPE = ??
(I hope those Unicode symbols came through okay.)
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
In 1.0 a marker will be used.
How would that work? If you use a fixed marker, it would have to be
something that wasn't a valid piece of program text in any of the
supported languages. But if yours is to be a universal compiler, that
becomes an impossible decision - every possible marker is valid program
text in as least one of the supported languages.
The obvious solution is to use different markers for different languages
- but that would still run afoul of any language that didn't have any
invalid program texts.
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
Does switching from one language to another require some kind of
explicit marker, or does neos figure it out? With what granularity?
In 1.0 a marker will be used.
How would that work? If you use a fixed marker, it would have to be
something that wasn't a valid piece of program text in any of the
supported languages. But if yours is to be a universal compiler, that
becomes an impossible decision - every possible marker is valid program
text in as least one of the supported languages.
The obvious solution is to use different markers for different languages
- but that would still run afoul of any language that didn't have any
invalid program texts.
Simple solution is to specify marker outside of main program sources,
say as a command line option or in first line of program.
In practice, there are existing multilingual systems (with no claim
of being "universal") where marking mechanism is really least of
the problem: while it can theortically clash with user constructs
probablity of clash is low enough and usually there are
workarounds.
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:...
...How would that work? If you use a fixed marker, it would have to be
something that wasn't a valid piece of program text in any of the
supported languages. But if yours is to be a universal compiler, that
becomes an impossible decision - every possible marker is valid program
text in as least one of the supported languages.
The obvious solution is to use different markers for different languages
- but that would still run afoul of any language that didn't have any
invalid program texts.
If it were me that was designing this concept, I'd pick some syntax that would be very unlikely to come up in real code - even if it might be
valid syntax in one or more languages.
For example, decide that the sequence "#¤§" at the start of a line is a "neos meta-escape". How likely is it that those characters might form
part of a normal valid line in some programming language? It's rather unlikely. The same goes for something longer but less cryptic, such as "##NEOS##".
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
On 2/14/25 03:48, David Brown wrote:
...
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
I wouldn't dream of trying to create a "Universal Compiler". However,
what little value I see in the concept lies in making it truly
universal. I don't see much value in supporting different languages in
the same file. Putting different languages in different files makes it trivial, without imposing restrictions on which languages it compiles..
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
On 2/14/25 03:48, David Brown wrote:
...
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
I wouldn't dream of trying to create a "Universal Compiler". However,
what little value I see in the concept lies in making it truly
universal. I don't see much value in supporting different languages in
the same file. Putting different languages in different files makes it
trivial, without imposing restrictions on which languages it compiles..
Do I need to explain advantages of inline assembly or embedded SQL?
Or having grammar and semantic actions in a single file?
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different
programming languages in the same source code file!
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
Not yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section
of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
https://neos.dev/
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
Not yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section
of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Do you have any good use-cases or "stories" for when mixing code from >different languages in a single file would be a useful thing? I am >particularly interested in more obscure or general combinations that you
want to support. And I'd like to know why you think this would be
better than, say, making some kind of foreign-function interface to
allow code in different languages in different files to interact more >conveniently.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:37:35 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> wibbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
And people say I'm rude.
So you've been working on this for 6 years and you still haven't even started >work on the actual compiler yet, you know, the bit that generates the >assembler (or machine code if you're feeling really brave).
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:50:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org
wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:37:35 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> wibbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown >>><david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you >>>>were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having >>>>trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not >>>>mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
And people say I'm rude.
So you've been working on this for 6 years and you still haven't even started >>work on the actual compiler yet, you know, the bit that generates the >>assembler (or machine code if you're feeling really brave).
No, I have mostly been busy working on other projects for the last 6
years.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:53:20 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> gabbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:50:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org
wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:37:35 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> wibbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown >>>><david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you >>>>>were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having >>>>>trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not >>>>>mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
And people say I'm rude.
So you've been working on this for 6 years and you still haven't even started
work on the actual compiler yet, you know, the bit that generates the >>>assembler (or machine code if you're feeling really brave).
No, I have mostly been busy working on other projects for the last 6
years.
I bet none of them are close to being finished either.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but >>>> I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
Not yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section
of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
On 15/02/2025 15:37, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a two week >>>>>>>>> holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but >>>>> I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
Not yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section >>>> of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
It would be hubris if I had claimed that you /had/ copied my idea. I
just asked a question, based on the order of events that I saw :
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this.
3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested.
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about.
But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >There's no need to get rude about it.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:33:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:53:20 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> gabbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 15:50:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org
wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:37:35 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> wibbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown >>>>><david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you >>>>>>were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having >>>>>>trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not >>>>>>mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because >>>>>of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
And people say I'm rude.
So you've been working on this for 6 years and you still haven't even >started
work on the actual compiler yet, you know, the bit that generates the >>>>assembler (or machine code if you're feeling really brave).
No, I have mostly been busy working on other projects for the last 6 >>>years.
I bet none of them are close to being finished either.
Your tiny mind is quite predictable, mate.
On 15/02/2025 15:37, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a >>>>>>>>> two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea,
but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
Not yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section >>>> of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
It would be hubris if I had claimed that you /had/ copied my idea. I
just asked a question, based on the order of events that I saw :
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this.
3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested.
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about.
But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. There's no need to get rude about it.
On 2/15/25 11:47 AM, David Brown wrote:
On 15/02/2025 15:37, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a >>>>>>>>>> two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, >>>>>> but
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
Not yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section >>>>> of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you
were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not
mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
It would be hubris if I had claimed that you /had/ copied my idea. I
just asked a question, based on the order of events that I saw :
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this.
3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested.
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about.
But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/.
There's no need to get rude about it.
Yeah, I was about to make a reply to his rudeness towards you. I can >understand the back and forth with Muttley, considering Muttley pushes
people at times and has rubbed people the wrong way in the past. But you
are not that way. I was willing to give Mr Flibble some latitude over
talking to Muttley, but after he said that to you, I'm out. Flibble lost
all respect from me at this point. David, you are an outstanding member
of this community and a true asset here. You shouldn't be treated that
way by anyone. Almost everyone knows who you are here.
Mr Flibble would be right to give you an apology. I suspect he has lost
1/3 of this community by treating you like this.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:47:12 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this. >>3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested.
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about.
But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>There's no need to get rude about it.
Rude? Man up, mate. "Fuck" is the best, most versatile word in the
English language which is why I use it.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 16:52:57 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> gabbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:47:12 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this. >>>3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested. >>>
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about. >>>But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>>There's no need to get rude about it.
Rude? Man up, mate. "Fuck" is the best, most versatile word in the
English language which is why I use it.
I bet experiencing its original meaning however eludes you.
Yeah, I was about to make a reply to his rudeness towards you. I can >understand the back and forth with Muttley, considering Muttley pushes
people at times and has rubbed people the wrong way in the past. But you
are not that way. I was willing to give Mr Flibble some latitude over
talking to Muttley, but after he said that to you, I'm out. Flibble lost
all respect from me at this point. David, you are an outstanding member
of this community and a true asset here. You shouldn't be treated that
way by anyone. Almost everyone knows who you are here.
Mr Flibble would be right to give you an apology. I suspect he has lost
1/3 of this community by treating you like this.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 11:54:35 -0500
Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> gabbled:
Yeah, I was about to make a reply to his rudeness towards you. I can >>understand the back and forth with Muttley, considering Muttley pushes >>people at times and has rubbed people the wrong way in the past. But you >>are not that way. I was willing to give Mr Flibble some latitude over >>talking to Muttley, but after he said that to you, I'm out. Flibble lost >>all respect from me at this point. David, you are an outstanding member
of this community and a true asset here. You shouldn't be treated that
way by anyone. Almost everyone knows who you are here.
Are you his dad or something?
Mr Flibble would be right to give you an apology. I suspect he has lost
1/3 of this community by treating you like this.
What community? Its a bunch of random people posting to a newsgroup.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 11:54:35 -0500, Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
wrote:
On 2/15/25 11:47 AM, David Brown wrote:
On 15/02/2025 15:37, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a >>>>>>>>>>> two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, >>>>>>> butNot yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section >>>>>> of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue. >>>>>>
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you >>>>> were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not >>>>> mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because
of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
It would be hubris if I had claimed that you /had/ copied my idea. I
just asked a question, based on the order of events that I saw :
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this. >>> 3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested. >>>
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about.
But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>> There's no need to get rude about it.
Yeah, I was about to make a reply to his rudeness towards you. I can
understand the back and forth with Muttley, considering Muttley pushes
people at times and has rubbed people the wrong way in the past. But you
are not that way. I was willing to give Mr Flibble some latitude over
talking to Muttley, but after he said that to you, I'm out. Flibble lost
all respect from me at this point. David, you are an outstanding member
of this community and a true asset here. You shouldn't be treated that
way by anyone. Almost everyone knows who you are here.
Mr Flibble would be right to give you an apology. I suspect he has lost
1/3 of this community by treating you like this.
Self appointed "community" gatekeepers who like to tone police are the
worst. Man the fuck up, dear.
/Flibble
On 2/15/25 12:00 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 11:54:35 -0500, Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
wrote:
On 2/15/25 11:47 AM, David Brown wrote:
On 15/02/2025 15:37, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 10:15:16 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 14/02/2025 14:25, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:48:56 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 13/02/2025 23:34, James Kuyper wrote:
On 2/12/25 17:00, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:46:52 -0800, Keith Thompson...
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
I hope to achieve neos Turing Completeness in March during a >>>>>>>>>>>> two week
holiday.
Also, did you know that with neos you can mix code from different >>>>>>>>>>>> programming languages in the same source code file!
<snip>
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, >>>>>>>> butNot yet implemented but see the "Mixing Programming Languages" section >>>>>>> of the neos homepage for current plan of language markers:
I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue. >>>>>>>
https://neos.dev/
Did you pick those markers before or after reading my post? (If you >>>>>> were inspired by my post, that's great - just because I am having
trouble seeing the point of some of your proposed features, does not >>>>>> mean I don't wish you the best with the project.)
Oh the hubris. Of course I didn't fucking pick those markers because >>>>> of your post. I picked those markers in 2019.
It would be hubris if I had claimed that you /had/ copied my idea. I
just asked a question, based on the order of events that I saw :
1. You claimed to have a way of mixing code.
2. Multiple posts asked you for details, and to say how you handled this. >>>> 3. You gave no answer to that.
4. I suggested a way to handle it.
5. You posted with a link showing that you did it in the way I suggested. >>>>
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about. >>>> But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>>> There's no need to get rude about it.
Yeah, I was about to make a reply to his rudeness towards you. I can
understand the back and forth with Muttley, considering Muttley pushes
people at times and has rubbed people the wrong way in the past. But you >>> are not that way. I was willing to give Mr Flibble some latitude over
talking to Muttley, but after he said that to you, I'm out. Flibble lost >>> all respect from me at this point. David, you are an outstanding member
of this community and a true asset here. You shouldn't be treated that
way by anyone. Almost everyone knows who you are here.
Mr Flibble would be right to give you an apology. I suspect he has lost
1/3 of this community by treating you like this.
Self appointed "community" gatekeepers who like to tone police are the
worst. Man the fuck up, dear.
/Flibble
Actually I was about to sponsor you. After looking at what you have and
what your trying to do, I've been interested. Yesterday I asked my
lawyer to start drawing up a proposal to sponsor for you for 3 years so
you could work on this project full time.
I get the situation with Muttley as already stated, but when you treat
others like David this way, when he's done nothing against you, it stops >people like me from wanting to provide financial grants. So that's why
I'm out. I wish you the best of luck, but you need to learn to treat
people better if you ever want to get sponsorships or financial grants >because people like me have long memories and we look at your past
history to determine the kind of person you are, so we know who we are >dealing with. That matters. So, best of luck to you. Keep up your work
and try to have fun in the process.
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:47:12 +0100, David Brown[...]
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious,
and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about. >>>But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>>There's no need to get rude about it.
Rude? Man up, mate. "Fuck" is the best, most versatile word in the
English language which is why I use it.
/Flibble
Your rudeness has made me lose interest in anything else you might
have to say. Call this "tone policing" if you like. I don't care.
I see that I had already killfiled you in this newsgroup, but you're
posting under a different email address now.
*plonk*
I see that I had already killfiled you in this newsgroup, but you're
posting under a different email address now.
On 14/02/2025 22:23, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
On 2/14/25 03:48, David Brown wrote:
...
I'm not suggesting that I think any of this mixture is a good idea, but >>>> I don't think making language-change markers is the biggest issue.
I wouldn't dream of trying to create a "Universal Compiler". However,
what little value I see in the concept lies in making it truly
universal. I don't see much value in supporting different languages in
the same file. Putting different languages in different files makes it
trivial, without imposing restrictions on which languages it compiles..
Do I need to explain advantages of inline assembly or embedded SQL?
Or having grammar and semantic actions in a single file?
I think there is certainly value in mixing particular languages in a
file - such as those you mention, or mixing PHP, HTML and JavaScript in
a file for a website. But that is all for specific combinations that
fit together in a natural way and have strong use-cases - it is not a
random mixture. And the different languages are handled by different
tools in different places - the C compiler does not handle the SQL code,
as that is passed on to the database server at runtime. The PHP
interpreter does not handle the JavaScript, it is passed on to the
user's browser.
There is also plenty of value in supporting multiple scripting languages
for a large software system. Big database server or CAD software will
often support scripts, procedures or functions in Python, Perl, Lua, JavaScript, BASIC-like languages or their own specific languages - users
can then write scripts in whatever language suits them.
I don't see much point in mixing such languages within a single file, however.
Of course you want some way to call functions and procedures written in different languages in such a system - but that doesn't need mixing of
the languages, just a common interface system.
There's obvious value in having a compiler (or interpreter, JIT tool,
VM, etc.) modularised and layered, with an aim to making it relatively
easy to write new language frontends and re-use the rest of the system.
And again, cross-language calling is useful. But again, mixing
languages within the one file is rarely going to be of benefit to
anyone, and could quickly be the source of confusion (as well as
complexity of implementation).
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 12:20:08 -0500, Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
wrote:
Actually I was about to sponsor you. After looking at what you have and >>what your trying to do, I've been interested. Yesterday I asked my
lawyer to start drawing up a proposal to sponsor for you for 3 years so
you could work on this project full time.
Bullshit.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:44:04 -0800, Keith Thompson ><Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:47:12 +0100, David Brown[...]
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious, >>>>and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about. >>>>But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>>>There's no need to get rude about it.
Rude? Man up, mate. "Fuck" is the best, most versatile word in the
English language which is why I use it.
/Flibble
Your rudeness has made me lose interest in anything else you might
have to say. Call this "tone policing" if you like. I don't care.
I see that I had already killfiled you in this newsgroup, but you're >>posting under a different email address now.
*plonk*
Thanks for explaining that: it was very important information that the
entire planet really needed to know. Calls may be monitored for
training purposes.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 22:59:33 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> wibbled:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 14:44:04 -0800, Keith Thompson
<Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> writes:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:47:12 +0100, David Brown[...]
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
I am perfectly aware that this way of marking code is pretty obvious, >>>>> and I expect it would be the most common approach people thought about. >>>>> But you might well have had other ideas in mind. That's why I /asked/. >>>>> There's no need to get rude about it.
Rude? Man up, mate. "Fuck" is the best, most versatile word in the
English language which is why I use it.
/Flibble
Your rudeness has made me lose interest in anything else you might
have to say. Call this "tone policing" if you like. I don't care.
I see that I had already killfiled you in this newsgroup, but you're
posting under a different email address now.
*plonk*
Thanks for explaining that: it was very important information that the
entire planet really needed to know. Calls may be monitored for
training purposes.
Far too many delicate sensibilities in this group. God knows how they'd have coped in a british school growing up. The rate they're killfilling people there'll just be a circle jerk of about 3 of them soon, not really saying much
to each other.
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 11:54:35 -0500
Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> gabbled:
Yeah, I was about to make a reply to his rudeness towards you. I can
understand the back and forth with Muttley, considering Muttley pushes
people at times and has rubbed people the wrong way in the past. But
you are not that way. I was willing to give Mr Flibble some latitude
over talking to Muttley, but after he said that to you, I'm out.
Flibble lost all respect from me at this point. David, you are an
outstanding member of this community and a true asset here. You
shouldn't be treated that way by anyone. Almost everyone knows who you
are here.
Are you his dad or something?
Mr Flibble would be right to give you an apology. I suspect he has
lost 1/3 of this community by treating you like this.
What community? Its a bunch of random people posting to a newsgroup.
And for the record, I grew up with British schooling.
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 14:13:03 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
And for the record, I grew up with British schooling.
And interestingly you haven't killfiled Muttley: that says a lot about
us Brits not being snowflakes.
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 14:13:03 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
And for the record, I grew up with British schooling.
And interestingly you haven't killfiled Muttley: that says a lot about
us Brits not being snowflakes.
/Flibble
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 13:18:38 +0000
Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 14:13:03 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
And for the record, I grew up with British schooling.
And interestingly you haven't killfiled Muttley: that says a lot about
us Brits not being snowflakes.
/Flibble
DavidB tolerates Muttley, because Muttley is Scottish. Were he English
there likely would be a different outcome.
Far too many delicate sensibilities in this group. God knows how they'd have coped in a british school growing up. The rate they're killfilling people there'll just be a circle jerk of about 3 of them soon, not really saying much
to each other.
On 16/02/2025 10:23, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
Far too many delicate sensibilities in this group. God knows how they'd have >> coped in a british school growing up. The rate they're killfilling people
there'll just be a circle jerk of about 3 of them soon, not really saying >much
to each other.
Are you really trying to argue that because kids were nasty to each
other in school, it's fine for people to be rude or nasty to each other
here? Seriously?
Think of this group as professional colleagues - not as your drunken
mates at the pub.
You get to choose how you post, and what you say. You don't get to
choose who will listen, or how they will react.
On 15/02/2025 18:04, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
What community? Its a bunch of random people posting to a newsgroup.
Usenet groups like comp.lang.c++ /are/ communities. There is a core of
Apparently you two (Muttley and Mr. Flibble) don't understand that. You
have both completely failed to read the room and join the community and
act like the rest of us, with the result that a fair proportion of
people here ignore you (by killfiles or just ignoring much of what you >write).
If you don't like this community, I'm sure you can find an alternative
one that suits you better.
I don't think it says anything about "us Brits", or anyone else. People
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 16:09:53 +0100
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled:
I don't think it says anything about "us Brits", or anyone else. People
IME brits and aussies (maybe kiwis, don't know), seem to be a lot more tolerant of rouch language than the americans who are somewhat prudish
about
it. Its a cultural thing. Yet a lot of the same americans who might get
angry
over bad language wouldn't think twice about packing a 9mm when they go
out.
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
[...]
Are you really trying to argue that because kids were nasty to each[...]
other in school, it's fine for people to be rude or nasty to each
other here? Seriously?
Please don't waste time and bandwidth arguing with trolls and giving
them the attention they crave. Or do you think you can use logical
arguments to persuade them to give up their trolling ways?
"Let them eat static" -- Khan Noonien Singh
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 57:07:37 |
| Calls: | 10,397 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 14,067 |
| Messages: | 6,417,448 |
| Posted today: | 1 |