Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Sat 29 Apr 2017, 14:00
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
taco bell programming
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]  
Author Message
learnhow2code

Joined: 12 Jun 2016
Posts: 1015

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 10:54    Post subject:  taco bell programming
Subject description: every item on the menu is just a configuration of roughly eight ingredients
 

http://widgetsandshit.com/teddziuba/2010/10/taco-bell-programming.html

note that i really dont consider this new, more like a new take on an old idea.

i liked dos, and i would probably still use it if not for two things: hardware compatibility and software compatibility (ha.) also, high-res graphics were unstable more often than not. (allegro and such.)

what i liked the most about dos was its overall simplicity. this wasnt a constant, it was a theme. in windows, mac and android, simplicity is superficial, it only applies to the top layer (which is always changing.) similar themes exist in the world of gnu/linux, but they are optional.

when i switched from basic to python, i didnt switch-- i found i was using one more than the other more and more, and the option of being more complex was always there. unlike being dragged from one paradigm (procedural to oop) to the next, i never felt i was being "forced" to use oop, even when there was "dot notation" involved:

Code:
def lcase(p): return p.lower()
# then i can do it this way:

print lcase("HELLO")


while its complicated to get into, gnu/linux (and even a mac, underneath the gui) gives you enough power to keep things as simple as you prefer them. first, you create your environment (which youre given the power to do) and then you use it.

you can keep things simple (the way you like) for years and years, while everyone else gets dragged from one fad to the next.

"taco bell programming" is basically using modern tools without all of the modern "hooey." though thats my own take on it.

bash is for the most part, a collection of c programs. the fact that so many people (including those who dont consider themselves "programmers," but could if they wanted to) use or edit bash demonstrates not only taco bell programming, but the ways in which a powerful, rigid and complicated-to-use language is very nicely utilized for creating a flexible, easier-to-use language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Flash
Official Dog Handler


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 12468
Location: Arizona USA

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 16:27    Post subject:  

To deconfuse myself, dos is (or was) an operating system that came with a scripting language also called dos, similar to the way Linux usually comes with Bash. Is that correct?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sailor Enceladus

Joined: 22 Feb 2016
Posts: 1046

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 16:35    Post subject:  

Flash wrote:
To deconfuse myself, dos is (or was) an operating system that came with a scripting language also called dos, similar to the way Linux usually comes with Bash. Is that correct?

I remember asking myself something similar: What is the Windows Manager in Windows? Apparently it's called Windows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
learnhow2code

Joined: 12 Jun 2016
Posts: 1015

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 18:31    Post subject:  

to explain dos to a gnu/linux user, i would start with gnu/linux:

step 1: dont worry about x, wayland and toolkits. microsoft ran windows 3.1 and previous on top of dos, and deliberately made windows refuse to run on competing systems-- in other words if they hadnt gone to the extra trouble, windows would have run on other competing versions of dos.

other graphical shells existed, few were useful. my favorite (way ahead of its time-- way better than windows 9x) was from central point (best known for their norton-like utilities and anti-virus software, and eventually purchased by microsoft.) but i think that ran in windows 3.x.


step 2: like puppy: no multi-user. not so much as pseudo-multiuser profiles even-- all the binaries (not required) were in c:\dos or a:\dos or wherever you put them (dos had a $PATH variable in its environment, which at a guess they took from cp/m and which-- still guessing-- cp/m took from unix.)

to install dos, you needed these files:

msdos.sys
sys.com
command.com

in windows 9x, msdos.sys is a config file. it was a binary before that.

command.com is "bash." the "scripts" (thats being kind) or lists of commands in a row that run one after the other are known as "batch files," "dos batch" or "dot bat" (.bat)

dos had no sh-bangs, it could only execute files ending in .bat or .com or .exe.

the batch language was not called "dos," any more than windows batch files are written in the "windows" language. this is just to clarify: dos is the "brand"-- there is no scripting language called "linux" either.

either msdos.sys or sys.com included the bootloader and was written to the first sectors of whatever drive it was copied to-- floppy or hard drive.

probably related: in windows 9x, msdos.sys has to be padded to be at least n bytes (1024?) or windows has problems.


step 3: most of the important stuff (/bin and /sbin) are built into command.com and the stuff you can get by without are in their own binaries. you can install dos to a boot floppy from the hard drive like this:

system a:

or to the hard drive like this:

system c:

perhaps it was system a: b: to copy from one floppy to the other floppy drive.

this copied msdos.sys and sys.com and command.com to the drive, and made it bootable.

autoexec.bat (a batch file) and config.sys are both text files used to configure the boot.

there is no "init." config.sys loads all the drivers, autoexec.bat is like rc.local.

you can generally boot with no autoexec.bat or config.sys, but some of your hardware may not work until you add it to config.sys and reboot. this is more true for peripherals than it is for the stuff you need most-- for exotic things like scsi drives-- well, most likely youre going to rely on the scsi onboard bios for those.

in short: take unix, remove all the features, and you have dos.


step 4: things ive done in dos without emulation or windows:

* svga graphics
* graphics editing with the mouse
* surfing the web using arachne
* irc
* video games (some really good ones, even with talking)
* writing cdrs
* using a bbs
* playing mp3s

to write sophisticated programs for dos, the most important thing is:

dos wont do anything for you. it wont even manage ram-- you need a memory manager loaded in config.sys for that.


step 5:

some of this has changed in (32 bit) freedos. not a lot.


Sailor Enceladus wrote:
What is the Windows Manager in Windows?[/url] Apparently it's called Windows.


you can start x using xterm as the "window manager" -- similarly, you can start windows using cmd (basically xterm) as the "shell."

in windows, the "shell" is what gnu/linux calls "the window manager."

the standard windows shell is explorer.exe -- this is incredibly similar to using jwm and the rox pinboard, except that jwm provides the toolbar and rox provides the icons.

but rox also has panels, so if you used one of those instead of jwm... but jwm also draws the decorations around each window, so if you really want a solid metaphor for explorer.exe youd need to give jwm a pinboard feature.

and no, lxde doesnt count-- it uses openbox and lxpanel, which are not in the same binary either.

alternative shells (window managers) for windows exist-- including ones that change the way that windows are managed or decorated-- the difference is, if you run xterm as the "window manager" it will have no decoration (or easy/way to move or resize the window) but on windows, if you run cmd (a dos term window) as the shell, windows still gives you basic window decorations and window management.

meaning that any shell you provide runs ON TOP of the basic one. x couldve done this, but it is designed not to. theres no reason you couldnt fork x to do exactly this (and theres not a lot of reason youd want to.)

one of the less-professional things about the windows approach is that (through windows xp at least) you could sometimes find the classic windows gui through places in the shell running on top, where the latter failed to load: basically a "standard window" style revealed through the windows "skin."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sailor Enceladus

Joined: 22 Feb 2016
Posts: 1046

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 21:04    Post subject:  

*stares at DOS computer confused* Where do the tacos come out?

edit: Oh, the shell... is a taco shell. And you don't need a fork because FreeDos is raised from it's own farm, but it's fish meat?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
learnhow2code

Joined: 12 Jun 2016
Posts: 1015

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 22:37    Post subject:  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjF032TDDQ raining tacos - parry gripp
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sailor Enceladus

Joined: 22 Feb 2016
Posts: 1046

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 22:47    Post subject:  

learnhow2code wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjF032TDDQ raining tacos - parry gripp

Oh not another one! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
learnhow2code

Joined: 12 Jun 2016
Posts: 1015

PostPosted: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 22:55    Post subject:  

suck it in, suck it in, suck it in, if youre rin tin tin or anne boleyn, make a desperate move or else youll win- and then begin to- baaa da da daaa da da da da da da da...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0


Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 10026
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Sun 28 Aug 2016, 06:04    Post subject:  

¡Yo quiero FreeDOS! Laughing


_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
« Un insensé sur le trône n'est qu'un singe sur le haut d'un toit. » / "A madman
on the throne is just a monkey on top of a roof." (Bernard de Clervaux)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
slavvo67

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Posts: 1347
Location: The other Mr. 305

PostPosted: Sun 28 Aug 2016, 15:22    Post subject:  

Yo tambien! The new breakfasts are quite good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1622s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0104s) ][ GZIP on ]