Re: [9fans] GUI toolkit for Plan 9

[Martin C.Atkins <martin@mca-ltd.com>]

On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 10:07:09 GMT "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <tb+usenet@becket.net> wrote:
> martin@mca-ltd.com (Martin C.Atkins) writes:
> 
> > I'm sorry that I can't remember *any* attribution, but I thought it
> > was "common wisdom/knowledge" that gcc only really worked properly
> > with -O turned on. That the optimiser "optimised away the bugs put in
> > by the code generator". This is going back a few years, so it may be
> > things have "improved"?
> 
> One of the dangerous things about FUD is that people continue to
> repeat it, when it was never true, without attribution except as
> "common wisdom".

That's as may be. But it never occurred to me that this might be FUD
(until you kindly pointed it out). Rather, I thought it was a
curiosity about the way that gcc's code generation worked (and not
*inherently* incorrect, so long as one didn't regard compiling
without -O as "compiling"), and - more importantly - a hint as to how
to avoid unnecessary pain (to me, as a user of gcc, at that time, and
still now).

(After all, I'm still really a Linux lurker. Also, having lost most
of yesterday trying to get Plan 9 to install on a new machine without
destroying it's partition table (I tried 3 times before giving up and
zeroing the disk), I'm not too well disposed to Plan9 right now.
Although to be fair, it's working great now..... - BTW: What *does*
"panic iunlock" mean (I think that was it), apart from "You're
stuffed - go and hit your head on a nearby wall, and then start
over..."? First time I thought it was because I had done something
silly, but the second time I *hadn't* done the silly thing....
Still, at least the good side effect is that I no-longer have Windows
on the machine :-) )

BTW: what's the Plan9 equivalent of Unix's "find . -name ... -print"? 
(always a good fallback for a beginner :-)

Martin
-- 
Martin C. Atkins	martin@mca-ltd.com
Mission Critical Applications Ltd, U.K.