(before it was Kool, KDE was a reference to CDE, the Common Desktop Environment)
The logo looks like an ASCII butt.
Put the E at the front and a 3 on the end and you have exactly that.
If your butt looks like that, please see a doctor.
I hate backronyms
Common is a pretty basic name, Kool is way cooler.
*Kooler
*kooler
It is weird that the one before that wasn’t just “single u”
“GNU is Not Unix Image Manipulation Program Tool Kit” is still a better name for GTK than “GIMP ToolKit”.
It’s a name that will definitely raise some eyebrows in the less technically inclined circles. (and maybe a few “Pulp Fiction” references about “bring out the gimp”)
I can’t wait to hear about the GNU Is Not UNIX Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of Hurd of Hird of
Don’t worry, at the rate it’s going it probably will never see the light of day in any usable sense for the average person.
im almost sad that its linux that became the dominating open source kernel instead of “GNU’s Not Unix! Hird of Unix-Replacing Daemons”
(hird stands for “Hurd of Interfaces Representing Depth”)and it goes HARD
I have a slightly higher appreciation for recursive acronyms now.
Engineers and naming things i guess?
GNU is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX is not UNIX[Maximum call stack size exceeded]
Wtf
How is this a thing??
Yeah some kind of fucky configuration.
The root is:
Which, if the
ubuntulink is clicked, then drops you into the the real archive root… but the link is “appended” to the new path, but the same link is reproduced in the “new” folder. Click it again, and another segment added to your current path even though you’re in the same root archive, ad nauseam.I couldn’t find this misconfiguration on stackoverflow, which leads me to believe someone at ubuntu is doing something especially special here.
I’d bet that they symlinked
/ubuntuto the server’s home root - probably for continuity with some previous file structure. It sure looks silly, but I’m sure the reasons for doing it were pretty reasonable.
Rofl amazing
That’s great, it even goes deeper
http://ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.ubuntu.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu/dists/mantic-backports/universe/debian-installer/binary-i386/by-hash/SHA256/e7ab72b8f37c7c9c9f6386fb8e3dfa40bf6fe4b67876703c5927e47cb8664ce4
deleted by creator
A tail-recursive version written in OCaml that should not reach stack limits easily. (Not an expert in OCaml, so this might be stupid. But I tried it with 10000 iterations, and it worked without any issues.)
let gnu = let rec aux s = function | 0 -> s | n -> aux (s^" is Not Unix") (n-1) in aux "GNU";;Not an OCaml expert either but that looks tail recursive, you’re never going to blow the stack.
You can tell by how after the recursive within aux, its result does not get used within the function. That means that the compiler doesn’t need to push a return address to the stack as the only code that would be at that address is instructions to pop another address and return there, we can short-circuit all that and jump from the r base case (0) directly to where aux(10000) is supposed to return to instead of taking 10000 dumb steps (like practically all procedural languages do because they don’t have tail call optimisation).
This would’ve been different if you had concatenated the string not as an argument to aux.
I thought Tail recursion just gets turned into an iterative loop by the compiler? Hence why you won’t get a stack overflow. And since in procedural languages you can just use a loop in place of a tail recursive function you would never run into this problem, right? At least this is how it was taught to me when I was learning about it in lisp.
Yes you still need the loop part I skipped over that one, only focussing on the “why no return address on the stack” part. It’s what you need to focus on to see whether a recursive call is in a tail position and if it is the compiler does the rest no need to worry about that part.
That was the idea. But I’m not a functional programmer (not a programmer by profession at all lol), so I might’ve done something stupid. Hence the disclaimer. Thanks for confirming.
OCaml certainly isn’t a bad language to learn for a non-professional. It’s almost painfully sensible and well-engineered, you’re far away from hype train nonsense and startup production jank but also not out in the “the purpose of this language is to be beautiful and earn me a PhD” territory, OCaml definitely is a production language.
GNU is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System is not UNiplexed Information Computing System
GNU IS NOT LINUX
Never let programmers name things 😁
Web browsers: elinks, based on links, which I’m pretty sure was a play on words on lynx, which is a play on words on “links” on a web page.
Then there’s email. There’s mahogany and balsa and mulberry, which are in-jokes referring to pine, which was a joke referring to elm, which stood for ELectronic Mail. Pine has been forked to alpine, in an entirely different play on words.
Pine has been forked to Alpine
Wonder if it runs on Alpine the Linux distro.
In other news, I never knew pine’s genetic code still lives on; but I miss elm more. Can we do uw-imap too? Dovecot annoys me.
I’ve run alpine on alpine, it works just fine
Open Watcom supports a debugging format called DWARF, which I assumed was a ridiculous acronym, until I learned it only works on ELF binaries.
The big one is how there was a programming language called A Programming Language. There is a B programming language, but it’s unrelated, being developed for Multics… Multics being the inspiration for Unix, a joke about castration. The developers of B went on to develop C. C was followed up by the command to increment a variable: C++. Except some interdisciplinary dorks thought it was a musical note and created C#. D is somehow a sequel to both of those.
There’s a reason why-- look. Nicholas Metropolis, namesake of the raytracing method, was sick of mainframe computers with ridiculous acronyms like ENIAC, AVIDAC, and ILLIAC, so he named his university’s new machine MANIAC. Absolutely no-one got the joke. All computer scientists are broken in the same peculiar way, and it is impossible to satirize how stupid we get when asked to name a thing.
My favorite part of the AI boom is how all the stupid internal names become public. It moves so fast that there’s no time to rebrand from the dork-ass things engineers come up with.
Naming things is hard, and everyone remembers these names, so they must have done something right.
Yes, naming things one of the three hard computing problems left along with cache invalidation.
I feel bad that you’ve been left hanging there.
What’s the third one? :)
Probably off-by-one errors
Yea no kidding. Gnome is pronounced Guhnome, Mate DE is pronounced Matay, Open Suse is susuh not soos, and Qt is to be pronounced as “cute” instead of just… Q-T. Many such cases.
Wait for real? I don’t think I’ve heard many say those terms out loud, i pronounce them in my head Nome, Mate, Soos, and q-t
What a coincidence, I’m currently learning GTK4/Libadwaita :>
deleted by creator
Linux lore is my favourite
It’s not GNUIMP it’s GIMP
It’s not GNUIMP it’s GIMP
what do you think the G is for
Gnu, expanded once not twice.
GNU is Not Unix is recursive
You’re recursive
You’re recursive
You’re recursive
It is you who is the one who is recursive.
Of course not, it’s the GNU[NU…]IMPTK.
Wait why didn’t they keep unpacking the recursive acronym further? GNU’s Not Unix’s Not Unix’s Not Unix’s Not Unix I’d say that’s a pretty good amount although if there’s a mathematical way of formulating the unpacking of acronyms in a text I’d like to see the that repeated until infinity.
i tried that and the stack overflowed
Fair enough.
Just put it in a formal grammar:
GNU -> GNU's Not Unix's GNU -> gnu GIMP -> GNU image manipulation program
