In no particular order: 100r.co, OpenBSD (& its many individual contributors such as tedu or JCS), Suckless/9front, sr.ht, Alpine, Gemini (&gopher) & all the people you can find there, Low Tech Magazine, antirez, Fabrice Bellard, Virgil Dupras (CollapseOS), & many other people, communities, and projects - sorry I don't have a single comprehensive list, that's just off the top of my head ;)
I would add Jochen Liedtke (unfortunately he passed away already more than 20 years ago) as inventor of the L4 microkernel.
Several research groups continued work on L4 after Liedtke's death (Hermann Härtig in Dresden, Gernot Heiser in Sydney, a bit of research at Frank Bellosa's group in Karlsruhe and more industrial research on L4 for embedded/RT systems by Robert Kaiser, later a professor in Wiesbaden), but I would still argue that Liedtke's original work was the most influential, though all the formal verification work in Sydney also had significant impact - but that was only enabled by the simplicity of the underlying microkernel concepts and implementations.
i... really don't think kris de decker is on niklaus wirth's level. i don't think he can write so much as fizzbuzz
fabrice bellard is wirth-level, it's true. not sure about tedu and jcs, because i'm not familiar enough with their work. it's absurd to compare most of the others to wirth and hoare
you're comparing kindergarten finger paintings to da vinci
> it's absurd to compare most of the others to wirth and hoare
You're the one trying to directly compare achievement, not me. If you're looking for top achievers, I'd have to name PHP or systemd, and THAT would be out of place ;)
I even said "in no particular order", because I don't think any two can be easily compared.
My main criterion for inclusion was the drive for simplifying technology, and publishing these efforts:
> An apostle [...], in its literal sense, is an emissary. The word is [...] literally "one who is sent off" [...]. The purpose of such sending off is usually to convey a message, and thus "messenger" is a common alternative translation.
Every single project, person, or community I've named here has some form of web page, blog, RSS feed, papers/presentations, and/or source code, that serve to carry their messages.
Achievement can be measured, simplicity can only be appreciated.
uxn is cool but it's definitely not the same kind of achievement as oberon, pascal, quicksort, forth, and structured programming; rek and devine would surely not claim it was
you don't get to be described as an 'apostle of simplicity' just because you like simplicity. you have to actually change the world by creating simplicity. devine and rek are still a long way from a turing award
you don't get to dictate who does or doesn't get recognized for creating awesome works that influence and inspire others. take your persistent negativity elsewhere.
btw, uxn is absolutely the exemplification of "software built for humans to understand" and simplicity. I mean...
> the resulting programs are succinct and translate well to pen & paper computing.
> to make any one program available on a new platform, the emulator is the only piece of code that will need to be modified, which is explicitly designed to be easily implemented
i don't think uxn is trivial, i think it's a first step toward something great. it definitely isn't the exemplification of "software built for humans to understand"; you have to program it in assembly language, and a stack-based assembly language at that. in that sense it's closer to brainfuck than to hypertalk or excel or oberon. it falls short of its goal of working well on small computers (say, under a megabyte of ram and under a mips)
the bit you quote about uxn having a standard virtual machine to permit easy ports to new platforms is from wirth's 01965 paper on euler http://pascal.hansotten.com/niklaus-wirth/euler-2/; it isn't something devine and rek invented, and it may not have been something wirth invented either. schorre's 01963 paper on meta-ii targets a machine-independent 'fictitious machine' but it's not turing-complete and it's not clear if he intended it to be implemented by interpretation rather than, say, assembler macros
i suggest that if you develop more tolerance for opinions that differ from your own, instead of deprecating them as 'persistent negativity' and 'dictating', you will learn more rapidly, because other people know things you don't, and sometimes that is why our opinions differ. sometimes those things we know that you don't are even correct
i think this is one of those cases. what i said, that you were disagreeing with, was that uxn was not the same kind of achievement as oberon, pascal, quicksort, forth, and structured programming (and, let me clarify, a much less significant achievement) and that it is a long way from [meriting] a turing award. i don't see how anyone could possibly disagree with that, or gloss it as 'uxn is trivial', as you did, unless they don't know what those things are
i am pretty sure that if you ask devine what he thinks about this comment, you will find that he agrees with every word in it
Someone sent me this thread so I could answer, and I do agree. I for one think uxn is trivial, it was directly inspired by the VM running Another World and created to address a similar need. It's not especially fast, or welcoming to non-programmers, it was a way for my partner and I to keep participating in this fantastic universe that is software development, even once our access to reliable hardware was becoming uncertain. It's meant to be approachable to people in a similar situation and related interests, and possibly inspire people to look into assembly and stack machines -- but it has no lofty goals beyond that. We're humbled that it may have inspired a handful of developers to consider what a virtual machine designed to tackle their own needs might look like.
A lot of our work is owed to Wirth's fantastic documentation on Oberon, to the p-machine and to pascal. Niklaus' works has influenced us in ways that it would be very unlikely that we could pass forward. I'm sad to hear of Nicklaus' passing, there are people who inspire me in similar ways, that are alive today and that I look up to for inspiration, but to me, Wirth's work will remain irreplaceable. :)
There wasn't a single place I asserted that uxn is specifically novel or unprecedented. In fact, Devine's own presentation[0] about uxn specifically cites Wirth and Oberon, among countless other inspirations and examples. I'm saying it's awesome, accessible, simple and open.
I don't need to "develop more tolerance for differing opinions" - I have no problem with them and am completely open to them, even from people who I feel are communicating in an unfriendly, patronizing or gatekeeping manner. rollcat shared some other people and projects and you took it upon yourself to shoot down as much as possible in that comment - for what purpose? No one said Drecker is "on Wirth's level" when it comes to programming. We don't need him to write FizzBuzz, let alone any other software. I'm sorry you don't recognize the value of a publication like Low-Tech Magazine, but the rest of us can, and your need to shoot down that recognition is why I called your messages persistently negative.
Further, when I give kudos to uxn and recognize it as a cool piece of software, there's absolutely no point in coming in and saying "yeah but it's no big deal compared to ____" , as if anyone was interested in some kind of software achievement pissing contest. The sanctity and reverence for your software idols is not diluted nor detracted from by acknowledging, recognizing and celebrating newer contributors to the world of computing and software.
I have to come back and edit this and just reiterate: All I originally said was "uxn ftw" and you found it necessary to "put me in my place" about something I didn't even say/assert, and make it into some kind of competition or gatekeeping situation. Let people enjoy things. And now, minimizing this thread and never looking at it again.
Yeah, these younguns have a lot to learn. :-) The notion that there's something innovative about using a small VM to port software is hilarious. BTW, here is a quite impressive and effective use of that methodology: https://ziglang.org/news/goodbye-cpp/
Dewey Schorre and Meta II, eh? Who remembers such things? Well, I do, as I was involved with an implementation of Meta V when I was on the staff of the UCLA Comp Sci dept in 1969.
Heh, no way do I remember the details. I just remember that we were rewriting it in 360 assembler but I left before that was completed (if it was), and that I wrote an Algol syntax checker in Meta V that was obliquely referenced at the end of RFC 57.
I think it was a very minor contribution ... they wrote a pseudo-Algol program as a form of documentation of their network protocol and were concerned about checking the grammar/syntax of the program (people actually cared about the quality of documentation back then), and I wrote a syntax checker for it in Meta V, as it was on hand because it was written at UCLA (I don't know whether it was Dewey (Val) who designed and implemented Meta V or someone else) and was used by people in the Comp Sci Dept. to design programming languages. But the dept was shifting to networking at the time (the IMP had just arrived) under the direction of Leonard Kleinrock and through the efforts of pioneers Steve Crocker, Vint Cerf, and Jon Postel (all of whom had attended Taft High School together) ... this is why the authors of that network protocol were visiting UCLA. I got involved because I worked for Crocker, under the direct management of Charley Kline, who was the fellow who made the first ever networked login.
