> C#: a Wersi OAS model, essentially a PC running Windows XP with some
> organ built around it. Pretends to be a Hammond B-3 but never will be -
> and preferably crashes in the midst of a recital!

C# crash? I think your C or C++ one would be far more likely to crash, 
unless in the hands of an experienced professional.

When I read the subject I was expecting things like brain, eyes etc, not 
pianos!

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)!

On 18.09.2015 11:26, scott wrote:
>> C#: a Wersi OAS model, essentially a PC running Windows XP with some
>> organ built around it. Pretends to be a Hammond B-3 but never will be -
>> and preferably crashes in the midst of a recital!
>
> C# crash? I think your C or C++ one would be far more likely to crash,
> unless in the hands of an experienced professional.
>
> When I read the subject I was expecting things like brain, eyes etc, not
> pianos!
>

Originally, I typed "were electronic organs" - but a Hammond B-3 (like 
any tonewheel Hammond) is not truly electronic (rather 
electro-magnetic), much less a Mighty Wurlitzer, which is a traditional 
pipe organ!

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Post a reply to this message

On 18/09/2015 10:26 AM, scott wrote:
> C# crash? I think your C or C++ one would be far more likely to crash,
> unless in the hands of an experienced professional.

On the other hand, the Mono implementation of C# was some wonderful bugs.

Like an implementation of ConcurrentQueue that only works correctly if 
used from one thread.

Or a bug where the implementation leaks process handles until you cannot 
launch any more processes.

Or that wonderful one where after a while, the Mono runtime receives 
SIGABRT for trying to map too many memory regions. What happens is that 
as the garbage collector frees empty memory pages, the address space 
slowly fragments, until you hit the maximum map limit. With a 
compile-time switch (i.e., you have to recompile the entire Mono 
platform from source), you can switch off free page releasing. At which 
point the runtime instead crashes due to exhausting all available memory...

I particularly enjoyed the time we tried to put out a release, and we 
have 3 versions of Mono to choose between, each one of which contained a 
different show-stopping bug. That was a fun meeting.

...why no, I'm not bitter. Why do you ask? :-P

All of this, of course, has little to do with C# as such, and is all to 
do with Mono specifically.

Post a reply to this message

On 17/09/2015 05:41 PM, "Jörg \"Yadgar\" Bleimann" wrote:

If programming languages were organs... then I would be seriously 
amazing at playing organs? :-D

> 6502 Assembler: a Dr. Böhm Benjamin kit, you can do hardly anything
> serious with it, but it's a lot of fun and perhaps inspires you to try
> something more sophisticated afterwards, such as a CnT/L...

What, you haven't tried Motorola 68000 assembly?

(I still can't figure out why nobody else designed their processors like 
this. You know, *logical*.)

> COBOL: a Mighty Wurlitzer Theater Organ! Not really electronic, but at
> that time, even computers were hardly...

What, no LISP?

> C#: a Wersi OAS model, essentially a PC running Windows XP with some
> organ built around it. Pretends to be a Hammond B-3 but never will be -
> and preferably crashes in the midst of a recital!

C# is about level with Java; it depends what implementation you're 
running it on.

> Forth: a weird Polish-made organ for left-handed players. Rumours has it
> that Karlheinz Stockhausen owned one.

What, no Haskell?

(Then again, if C# is a Wersi OAS and COBOL is a Wurlitzer, then I guess 
that makes Haskell some sort of pneumatic keytar...)

Post a reply to this message

> All of this, of course, has little to do with C# as such, and is all to
> do with Mono specifically.

Now you see if Mono was open-source, you (or anyone else) could fix 
these bugs yourself :-)

Post a reply to this message

COBOL a theather organ?  Then no doubt Lisp is a cathedral organ where the best
fugues and preludes were played. ;)

Post a reply to this message

On 21/09/2015 07:51 AM, scott wrote:
>> All of this, of course, has little to do with C# as such, and is all to
>> do with Mono specifically.
>
> Now you see if Mono was open-source, you (or anyone else) could fix
> these bugs yourself :-)

Hah. Haha. Ahahahahaha! You're funny. ;-)

My college was just looking at the Mono build infrastructure; he says 
the build has been broken in their CI system since January... Man, if 
even the official Mono developers can't fix their own CI server... damn.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 21/09/2015 07:51 AM, scott wrote:
> >> All of this, of course, has little to do with C# as such, and is all to
> >> do with Mono specifically.
> >
> > Now you see if Mono was open-source, you (or anyone else) could fix
> > these bugs yourself :-)
>
> Hah. Haha. Ahahahahaha! You're funny. ;-)
>
> My college was just looking at the Mono build infrastructure; he says
> the build has been broken in their CI system since January... Man, if
> even the official Mono developers can't fix their own CI server... damn.

"If engineers designed buildings the way computer programmers write software,
the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization." --adage

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Le 27/09/2015 21:47, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
> Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> On 21/09/2015 07:51 AM, scott wrote:
>>>> All of this, of course, has little to do with C# as such, and
>>>> is all to do with Mono specifically.
>>> 
>>> Now you see if Mono was open-source, you (or anyone else) could
>>> fix these bugs yourself :-)
>> 
>> Hah. Haha. Ahahahahaha! You're funny. ;-)
>> 
>> My college was just looking at the Mono build infrastructure; he
>> says the build has been broken in their CI system since
>> January... Man, if even the official Mono developers can't fix
>> their own CI server... damn.
> 
> "If engineers designed buildings the way computer programmers write
> software, the first woodpecker that came along would destroy
> civilization." --adage
> 
> 
It's not engineers, but architects... and they do far worse than
programmers (but programmers cheat: they have a compiler).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iJwEAQEIAAYFAlYJdF8ACgkQhKAm8mTpkW1j0AP+K69h2yxkjNpNatcLCLC4LqaI
fOAerS44hL0LyserfdUTQGJ+jIAwVT3JFtG4CJ84DqU/zRh6H6S+F3QdtiJmrEuq
fNkgJ34qWiCkr553UF46Ep0YIzGEpSyIvqgsrNFXjNjk4uqWNB25oofAWnqnzF5L
Ckdoc7inxOOkrxdtJ2o=
=dd7G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

Am 27.09.2015 um 21:47 schrieb Cousin Ricky:

> "If engineers designed buildings the way computer programmers write software,
> the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization." --adage

Nah, not really. The first building succumbing to a woodpecker would
prompt new building designs to use solid cast iron rather than wood.

Which would create new problems, like buildings sinking into the ground
and stuff, or multi-storey buildings collapsing under their own weight,
but the woodpecker issue would be solved...


Actually, if architects designed buildings the way computer programmers
write software, buildings would be subject to destruction from /termite
infestation/, or being blown away by a hurricane...

... oh, wait...!

/Now/ I understand what Americans mean when they say that a house was
"built to code"...!

Post a reply to this message