Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#2Insert mandatory "Can it run doom?" joke
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#3Insert mandatory "Can it run doom?" joke
Well, technically it can!
> tmux -c $DOOM
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#4Insert mandatory "Can it run doom?" joke
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#5See also:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30189780 - Accidentally Turing-Complete (2022-02-05)
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#6The moment you think your configuration language needs loops or conditionals, drop it and just throw a scripting language on there. Your users will thank you.
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#7The moment you think your configuration language needs loops or conditionals, drop it and just throw a scripting language on there. Your users will thank you.
Implied by “loops” but wanted to also point out self-referential definitions / recursion
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#8The moment you think your configuration language needs loops or conditionals, drop it and just throw a scripting language on there. Your users will thank you.
I mean, the tmux author kinda did. You can just execute sh inline, or execute external sh scripts. I do this with my config to do some neat things.
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#9The moment you think your configuration language needs loops or conditionals, drop it and just throw a scripting language on there. Your users will thank you.
I often read this, and I'm not sure I agree always. From the final user point of view, sure, give me a known language and don't make me learn a new config format for each program. 100% Agree.
But, now, let's go with examples from another view point:
Let's say there are different levels of support teams in an infra, and you (root) make a custom tool, so other teams can run something (and only that thing).
And that thing, has a config file. I don't want to give sudo to lua, I want to give sudo only to my tool.
It's like if we say "Don't provide the final user with a User Interface, just let them connect to the database as admin so they can do everything by themselves"
In this case, doesn't apply (sudo tmux == sudo bash).
Or another point of view:
tmux is 981K on my system, adding... lua? for the config, could increase it's size by maybe at least 30%? It's not the same to add an scripting lang to a 230GB game, than to every little tool.
Depending on context, an scripting language is ok. However, not always as a rule of thumb.
Re: Show HN: Making a Compiler to Prove Tmux Is Turing Complete
#10The moment you think your configuration language needs loops or conditionals, drop it and just throw a scripting language on there. Your users will thank you.
I often read this, and I'm not sure I agree always. From the final user point of view, sure, give me a known language and don't make me learn a new config format for each program. 100% Agree. But, now, let's go with examples from another view point: Let's say there are different levels of support teams in an infra, and you (root) make a custom tool, so other teams can run something (and only that thing). And that thi…
If you’re going to make this jump from YAML to something with a little control constructs, your users will thank you if you go straight to a 3Lisp with full metasyntactic capability.
It’s the most user friendly thing you could do.