Posts by ffff@letsalllovela.in
(DIR) Post #9gFuF5kiEs8CxvFqtc by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-02-27T09:11:36.893209Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
I spend all this time to look back and realize... RBX... is a non-volatile register and I can't over-write it.... what a waste...
(DIR) Post #9gFwlQfCEA86zkDoWW by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-02-27T09:39:52.038076Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
this is what it looks like... when my VPSHUFB instruction has the wrong mask... I didnt read right, and thought it used 7 bits! but it only uses 4
(DIR) Post #9gGajCWJpwX6iZYtlY by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-02-27T17:07:39.569107Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
you can convert an RGBA bitmap to BGRA using VPSHUFB with a mask xmmword 0F0C0D0E0B08090A0704050603000102H , this turns an xmmword of four packed RGBA pixels into four BGRA pixels, you can write a 128 byte aligned unrolled loop!On AVX2 you can use a ymmword! So alignment can be 256 bytes!
(DIR) Post #9gTEz8z74s2mRuhqgy by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-05T19:35:16.974269Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull What did you use in the 1980s? If you look at the operating systems on micro computers people had... none of them had what you are talking about!Commodore/Z80/Apple/etc Basic: no multi tasking or memory protectionMS-DOS: no multi tasking or memory protectionAmigaOS: no memory protectionMacOS: no preemptive multitasking, no memory protectionWindows: no preemptive multitasking, no memory protectionMMU's were not even in most of the hardware! So memory protection, is just, not possible.... how can you say that this was standard? Also... we have these, in our, new operating systems, mostly.... you can try and crash it but it's hard now! This is a strange statement... we have virtual memory and preemptive multitasking...
(DIR) Post #9gTV8y7vtqYYw9XRNw by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-05T22:36:19.388091Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull It's just a commentary about how, it doesn't make sense to say that the 80s had that. Preemptive multitasking was figured out in the 90s and standard only by 2000 when Apple finally finished Mac OS X. Memory protection wasn't standard either for a while... I agree about making better software. But I think it's a strange claim saying that these things were standard in the 80s. Java web plugin is an idea lots of people wanted, but a bad implementation. The same thing was tried with Flash, JavaScript, Silverlight and now Web Assembly. So I wouldn't say that the idea of doing it is wrong. If you only allowed bytecode that actually would allow you to virtualize memory so its fair to say that adding that in would fix the problem. (but at what cost?) I'm only commenting on how operating systems in the 80s generally didn't have any memory protection and really probably couldn't afford it because of the speed penalty of bytecode like that. I don't know what you mean specifically about the preemptive multitasking guarantees. Are you saying Windows NT and Linux, other modern operating systems, don't guarantee preemption? I'm interested in knowing more about that.
(DIR) Post #9gTXD8whoiXnYePBho by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-05T22:59:30.163727Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull Who did it first is different from "when did it become the standard", which is what we were talking about. Bytecode only operating system's existing doesn't mean that a bytecode only operating system was the right choice on something like a 286. If preemption was really broken, you wouldn't be able to kill Firefox at all. That's just poor scheduling, it's tanking the system sure but it's not breaking anything. That's very different from your claim about not having preemption guarantees. You're living in the world you asked for already... or else Firefox could never forfeit its timeslice and take the whole system down. The OS is doing everything you're asking for. You're just running bad software on it, and then blaming the OS, which is working fine and holding up.You could ask the OS to starve programs that don't behave like that, but it's not that simple... things could be better, though, sure
(DIR) Post #9gTXgWFoEkpcFELeng by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-05T23:04:49.203482Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull Windows has a partial solution to this- CTRL+ALT+DELETE is bound to bring up a settings menu that lets you bring up the task manager and shut the program down. But it's not as good as just bringing up a better program designed to help you kill bad programs faster, like suspending the system and running a task manager equivalent in fullscreen. This is a solution because CAD is a direct BIOS call so it can't be screwed by a clogged kernel. I don't think Linux does this but it's something that it could do.
(DIR) Post #9gTwnviUSoRS63OUkq by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T03:46:16.634403Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull But it is! You said that preemption garuntees were not being met. Clearly they ARE if you could still get to your terminal and close Firefox. We can talk about how well that situation is being handled.... but that's a different discussion than what your claim implied. If other programs are running then FF is being preempted correctly. Resource allocation and starving within those boundaries is different! Firefox is not exceeding it's timeslice! The kernel is giving it that much of a timeslice and it is using it! That's not true... it's not possible! The kernel decided that Firefox gets to have those time slices- not the other way around! The operating system decided that this is how it wants to allocate resources and that was how resources were allocated. If you think it can do a better job at deciding what resources to allocate, that's very different from saying it's not doing it's job enforcing the limits it sets!
(DIR) Post #9gU1zL1dCr1lXwbeeO by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T04:44:21.682420Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull It still followed the preemption guarantees. You just weren't patient enough...What the user thinks is off topic. You're throwing around technical claims that just aren't true! These aren't vague words to talk about how you feel about something vaguely related to them.... they mean something really specific! And it's not what you're talking about... You can talk about your experience as a user. But that's very different from the technical claims you were making! It's a different conversation...
(DIR) Post #9gU2VxgezxHeijLyKG by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T04:50:15.566091Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull But it IS multitasking.... you're talking past me.... please,, consider the rest of my post, you have an interrupt timer, on your PC, it brings you to ring zero, and the scheduler runs... You can talk about what decision the scheduler makes but that's very different from saying that the preemption guarantee is gone! please... re read some of my posts ok? I'm having to repeat myself.... I dont know if you can , understand me or not...
(DIR) Post #9gU2y8bQ0a7ygNKxCS by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T04:55:21.631785Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull next time.... consider starting the conversation talking about that... instead of throwing around technical claims that just aren't true? consider... talking about that... instead of saying "preemption guarantees are not being followed!" You don't need to make technical claims that aren't true to make your point! You don't need to pretend... that the conversation is about what you want it to be about... instead of what you said it was about...
(DIR) Post #9gU388LDpnZ6lgWm24 by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T04:57:09.520415Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull this is bad but... it has very little to do with what you started the conversation about. you're changing the topic... to what you want it to be about.. not what you said it was about!
(DIR) Post #9gU3Pd3gsjEIxVfaqG by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T05:00:18.688873Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecull You said that time slice rules are not being followed! You said that, preemptive multitasking guarantees are not being held! You're trying to change the topic into a general conversation about latency when that has nothing to do with the claims you made! Please... I only said that time slice rules are being followed and preemption is being followed! I said... multiple times... how the scheduler decides what time slices to give... is a different conversation! Not this one...
(DIR) Post #9gU3f53p3KYu9L6E3E by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-06T05:03:06.997188Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@natecullI only said... that preemption and time slice rules are working as the kernel decided. Because they are! You are, pretending that I am talking about something completely different... you are having a conversation with yourself!
(DIR) Post #9gY6ZvjpMZRcHcp31E by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-08T03:54:38.936157Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@ThomasWic jews and muslimes are not Americans.... it's not so hard... we are, our own people, with our own motives! When you take a side with a Jew or a Muslim... you are NOT taking the side of your own people...
(DIR) Post #9giQzrjsnMxI4c5lAW by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-13T03:30:33.196849Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
that steam is proprietary software and also a computer virus!!!! please , if you are using steam you should not be , o k , andsorry everyone but , I'm worried about , some of the posts here, first, fris t first of all
(DIR) Post #9giRAP1Vtq3kCOMYoC by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-03-13T03:32:27.550081Z
3 likes, 1 repeats
talk about this game that people , said it ,, "halo"... first of all everyone halo is, PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE! that means you shouldn't play it! look...there are lots of good open source games! sorry but, halo, its not eve n a good game and never was.... look... you can play , open source video games that are way cooler!
(DIR) Post #9haUCXYm4uMkljMdF2 by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-04-08T05:20:51.447658Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@pinksock WOW!
(DIR) Post #9hekvz7ep6zRBPDAzA by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-04-10T06:47:12.438485Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Epsiloco @caseyp you can do it! Program is fun haha
(DIR) Post #9hel3YeV7gvvP5BWnA by ffff@letsalllovela.in
2019-04-10T06:48:34.141712Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
@freon you should tell him that mind craft is proprietery software...