I imagine that the XAML output by this app would work with Uno Platform. If XAML Studio itself can be made cross-platform, this would create a fairly nice cross-platform C# story.

https://platform.uno/platform/

Well, I don’t know Fortran 66. So, obviously step one is having an LLM convert it to Python for me. /s

Well obviously with vibe coded stuff, you just put the code back in the AI and ask for documentation.

Problem solved. /s

I totally understand the reaction. The objection makes sense.

The Distrowatch numbers are clearly nonsense. The biggest reason they are nonsense is because they feed into each other. “Oh hey, I have never heard of MX Linux, I wonder what that is”. Click. And nobody needs to be told what Ubuntu is.

But I full expect the traffic pattern at a website like OSI to be quite different. And what brings people to a license page to begin with?

Anyway, we can see from the results that the methodology is not as flawed as we fear. Because it closely aligns with other sources.

But again, I get the objection. We would have to take these conclusions with a grain of salt and agreement with other sources before basing any decisions on it.

Still, I found it interesting.

Thankfully, we have much better data on license popularity than we do for say programming language popularity, or Linux distribution use for that matter.

Fair enough I suppose. There is no guarantee that pageviews reflect usage. In this case though, the error is likely to skew even further towards popularity.

The OSI website is not Distrowatch. Why would a user be looking up a license?

I would say that “I would guess” that the OSI page view ranking mirrors real world popularity. I do not have to guess though as I can see that this is the case. So I will have to settle with saying I am not surprised.

I mean, I would not trust the results too far down the list but I fully expected the first 5 or so to align.

Well, you could also count packages in most Linux repos. You would reach the same conclusions.

Or, you could look at licenses on GitHub. The same story is repeated there.

I take it this collides with your assumptions?

What?

First one is optimized obvious.

Second one optimizes to x = 10 via constant propagation.

Third one first unrolls the loop, propagates constants including booleans, and then eliminates dead code to arrive at x = 10.

The last one cannot be optimized as “new” created objects that get used, nextInt() changes the state of those objects, and the global state of the random number system is impacted.

“I didn’t betray the client and get killed”

Betrayed the client and lived? /s

Two actors from the movie Cammando.

The guy in the right was super elite. The guy on the left, not so much.

At my dump, you get weighed on the way in and out and you pay for the weight you drop. So, if you leave your garbage and load up some ewaste, it saves you money. They are literally paying you to take it away.

I have a laptop that I use regularly that I actually found at the recycle center when I dropped off some bottles. It is running Linux of course.

Well, I think some fully remote is fine. However, I do think hybrid is the best model. Just my opinion.

One of the “dangers” of fully remote is that they become fully global. The amount a company will pay becomes disconnected from the cost-of-living. That creates inequity. Not just that employees in richer areas may be underpaid but also that remote employees for rich companies may be paid far more than their countrymen in their home market.

I don’t really like the idea of running decades of income lottery while the global order works this all out.

Even within a single country it can be fairly extreme.

In my opinion, if they want this to work, they need to create a shared infrastructure for delivery that they can all use. This infrastructure needs to be a paid service for users with published pricing sorted into service tiers.

The base tier can be free with no support or “community” support. This tier can have a generous but finite usage ceiling. For higher volume users, there is a cost but also some level of “support”. That is, you can call somebody if the infrastructure is not working, performance sucks, there has been a security issue, accounts need to be segmented or merged, etc. You could also charge for performance. Why not both?

This service would operate as an independent company. It would be a service provider to the “foundations” or projects that use it. This means having payroll, legal, accounts receivable, support, and operations (eg. vetting the material they host). It would be a real company (non-profit ideally). However, instead of costing money, the service would distribute some of the fees it collects back to the projects it serves. At the very least, it would make the cost of distribution zero.

The most important part of the above is that there is definitive pricing for high-volume and/or high-need consumers. This can be budgeted and funded just like any other software or service purchase.

Problem solved.

You need a price. If you say, we need this infrastructure or technology and it costs x dollars, that can be justified, approved, and budgeted.

In most places I have worked, “my department uses something we get for free but they really want us to contribute what we can” would go exactly nowhere. Pushing too hard may actually even lead up a directive to switch to something less problematic, maybe even something commercial (that has a definitive price).

So what you are saying is that a lot gets done on those days.

Anyway, I agree that hybrid is the best model.

The founder of the Ladybird project is quite good at getting attention for his projects. He used it first to build community around his SerenityOS project. He is using it now to build awareness around Ladybird and, in particular, to attract financial sponsors.

My assumption is that the level of promotion triggers distrust in the commenter.

In my view, it should be a model for Open Source projects in general. He managed to get enough Patreon support to go full-time on SerenityOS. Many devs provide absolutely crucial software used by everyone while struggling to also work ful-time and pay the bills. He was able to use that full-time freedom to start something as ambitious as a ground-up browser project within SerenityOS. And he attracted many collaborators to his cause. Progress was rapid enough that he split off into the dedicated Ladybird browser project for which he now has an impressive list of financial sponsors. This has allowed his to hire full-time staff. There are still volunteers.

If every Open Source project followed his lead, the world would be a difference place.

It is worth noting how much more slowly SerenityOS is evolving now that he is gone. And what is happening is largely invisible to the wider world.

In my mind, the effective community engagement has allowed the Ladybird project to advance with less corporate oversight, not more. There is less risk of this becoming Google or Mozilla. Of course, time will tell.

HEIF

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Image_File_Format

Look at everyday things that occasionally improve. We have probably not found the optimal way for almost anything.

Most of us just are not smart enough to find a better way.

I have built single pass compilers that do everything in one shot without an AST. You are not going to get great error messages or optimization though.

GCC is adding cool new languages too!

They just recently added COBOL and Modula-2. Algol 68 is coming in GCC 16.