Show HN: A “living” Linux process with no memory

meddlepal wrote: post #3

ebg13 wrote: post #2

It's 2020. You couldn't have done this in Python3?

There's nothing wrong with using Python 2 for a PoC.

I'd be much more reluctant to get on OP’s case about it than GP, but there’s a strong argument to be made that this hurts the overall python ecosystem.

Re: Show HN: A “living” Linux process with no memory

#8

Post by hsnewman » Thu, Mar 26, 2020, 2:57 PM UTC

Can this be implemented in Go?

Re: Show HN: A “living” Linux process with no memory

#9

Post by croo » Thu, Mar 26, 2020, 3:01 PM UTC

> Why? I don't know. I thought it was funny

This is the profit.

While job searching I went on an interview where I got asked why I did a side gig listed on my resumee. "For friend or for money?" It was neither and I said "I don't know, because programming is fun?"

I got hired.

Re: Show HN: A “living” Linux process with no memory

#10

Post by kick » Thu, Mar 26, 2020, 3:02 PM UTC

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #7

meddlepal wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing wrong with using Python 2 for a PoC.

I'd be much more reluctant to get on OP’s case about it than GP, but there’s a strong argument to be made that this hurts the overall python ecosystem.

There's also a strong argument to be made that people shouldn't have to care about ecosystems that are so delicate that a proof of concept in a previous version "hurts the overall [ecosystem]."

"How dare you use a hammer! We're all using Hammer 2 now! I don't care that it was 'Only one nail," put it down and pick up Hammer 2! Your hammer is what, ten years old? That's ancient! It's not even compatible with my Hammer 2! What do you mean, 'They hit the same fucking nails!' That's not the point! I can't track how many nails you're hitting per-minute now, or even take advantage of the nails you've hit! It's barbaric!"

Can you imagine?