Remember the "One Laptop Per Child" project, that developed a low-cost computer for children in developing countries?
-
For myself, ideally, the script would set up a #Nix flake with all dependencies in it, and activate it using direnv. Which would probably mean transforming the nixpkgs package into a flake?
The script could also give you some aliases to run the nixpkgs phases like configure, patch, or build, from your current shell – I like using the fish shell, but the stdenv assumes bash. I haven't found a reasonable way to invoke the phases "in a subshell"… Getting errors like this: https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/15282
@blinry this looks extremely useful / promising!
-
Remember the "One Laptop Per Child" project, that developed a low-cost computer for children in developing countries? I was always amazed by a certain feature: The "View Source" button.
When you pressed it, the source code for the currently running application would open. This was supposed to encourage tinkering with the software on your device!
I've been pondering what it would take to build that button on modern machines. Has anyone seen something like that?
(Prototype in next toot.)
@blinry Well. Several idea pop up. The currently focused Application is easy to find. With something like apt-file you can find the package, download the source package and show that. That won't be much fun.
If you were to limit it to python-Apps, showing the directory of the python-file seems easy. Then you will want an overlay fs to not destroy the installed App, but write changes to "disk" and rerun the application from there.
-
@blinry Not sure if I'm thinking too complicated here, but doesn't it get ever more complicated what exactly to show there?
If I'm currently looking at a web app that shows some data retrieved from a server-side backend in a browser whose UI is written in (say) Python calling one of the dominant rendering engines and one of the dominant Javascript engines, which of the sources do I show on “View Source”?
It could be anything from the operating system kernel via the CPython or the Javascript runtime to the web app or its server-side counter-part that could be considered most interesting and answering the question: “Oh, I wonder how this works.”
@HeptaSean Yeah, that doesn't really seem possible to figure out. For non-web applications, maybe the button could show you the tree of processes that are involved in your "current application", and allow you to pick?
For expert users, I guess they could provide the name of the desired component directly.
-
You'd roughly need to:
- Figure out which program is currently focused
- Figure out the Git repo of this software
- Clone it into a temporary directory
- Set up the required tools to start hacking on it and compile itAs a quick prototype, I wrote a li'l Bash script that does some of these things. It makes heavy use of #nix and #nixpkgs:
view-source-button
view-source-button - A script that allows you to start tinkering with software
Codeberg.org (codeberg.org)
I enters a "dev shell" with the required tools already in the PATH, and even sets up a Git remote to start contributing.
@blinry
Is it possible to find out what shared library is responsible for some windows? I often wonder which project is actually behind the file browser or print dialog that I'm using and whether I can change it. My understanding is that these are usually delegated to an SO? -
@blinry Might I suggest using `nix eval --raw nixpkgs#$PKG --apply 'pkg: …'` to avoid repeatedly invoking `nix eval`?
@korenchkin Oh cool, that would speed things up a bit for sure!
-
@blinry
Yeah, I've often wondered about that myself. I understand that you can install the Sugar DE on Linux, generally, and get that "view source" button. But it seems specifically designed to oppose multitasking, too.@TerryHancock Ohh, I didn't know it was still (kind of) maintained!
-
@blinry Well. Several idea pop up. The currently focused Application is easy to find. With something like apt-file you can find the package, download the source package and show that. That won't be much fun.
If you were to limit it to python-Apps, showing the directory of the python-file seems easy. Then you will want an overlay fs to not destroy the installed App, but write changes to "disk" and rerun the application from there.
@snaums Yeah, I also thought this should work well with tools that do a "reverse lookup" from your binary to a software package!
You mean it won't be fun because you can't easily modify the source code and then use it immediately? That's probably right…
-
@TerryHancock Ohh, I didn't know it was still (kind of) maintained!
@blinry
Well, I have never actually tried it, but supposedly it's there.I do see the point in trying to port the "view source" feature to a more conventional DE. It seems unlikely that I could commit to using Sugar as a general purpose environment, but it would be cool for some of the ideas to get around.
-
@blinry
Is it possible to find out what shared library is responsible for some windows? I often wonder which project is actually behind the file browser or print dialog that I'm using and whether I can change it. My understanding is that these are usually delegated to an SO?@TerryHancock I've sometimes used `ldd` to show the linked libraries of a binary; but trying that on some examples the list seems to be either under- or overwhelming!
-
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
-
Remember the "One Laptop Per Child" project, that developed a low-cost computer for children in developing countries? I was always amazed by a certain feature: The "View Source" button.
When you pressed it, the source code for the currently running application would open. This was supposed to encourage tinkering with the software on your device!
I've been pondering what it would take to build that button on modern machines. Has anyone seen something like that?
(Prototype in next toot.)
@blinry my immediate thought was: step 1, write an accurate decompiler
-
Or have the entire system built around being interpreted like Python or C#. Maybe C# would even be a better option as it's JIT compiler is better in my eyes. And it integrates better with that XML based GUI definition language Microsoft had.
Edit: WPF XAML was it.
@agowa338 @blinry Wasn't C# simply a MS repackage of MS J++, the MS version of Java, because they were sued by Sun?
Years ago I used to peer inside Java "jars" on XP and Ubuntu.I found C# far better than VB.net, but both inferior to VB6 for quick GUIs on SQL or simulating keypad and LCD of a microcontroller and prototyping the code.
Then I went back to RF design and mostly abandoned programming apart from JAL on PIC18.
But view source is very niche. You only want the overhead on a Dev's PC. -
@snaums Yeah, I also thought this should work well with tools that do a "reverse lookup" from your binary to a software package!
You mean it won't be fun because you can't easily modify the source code and then use it immediately? That's probably right…
@blinry If you limit it to python, it could be fun. C/C++ code has to be compiled and that can take _a while_. Maybe it would work better on something like Gentoo. Or maybe you'd have a system, where in a special environment, everything is built from package-source once, then can be edited and recompiled in seconds.
-
@agowa338 @blinry Wasn't C# simply a MS repackage of MS J++, the MS version of Java, because they were sued by Sun?
Years ago I used to peer inside Java "jars" on XP and Ubuntu.I found C# far better than VB.net, but both inferior to VB6 for quick GUIs on SQL or simulating keypad and LCD of a microcontroller and prototyping the code.
Then I went back to RF design and mostly abandoned programming apart from JAL on PIC18.
But view source is very niche. You only want the overhead on a Dev's PC.don't know. Was before my times.
And btw, there is basically 0 overhead from "view source" in C#, as the JIT will at runtime optimise the code and cache the compiled code until it is invalidated by you changing the source or something. In fact if you're writing powershell and the interpreter hits a loop the first few passes will be interpreted while it is in the background compiling it. And once it is done it'll on-the-fly switch over to the optimised compiled code.
-
don't know. Was before my times.
And btw, there is basically 0 overhead from "view source" in C#, as the JIT will at runtime optimise the code and cache the compiled code until it is invalidated by you changing the source or something. In fact if you're writing powershell and the interpreter hits a loop the first few passes will be interpreted while it is in the background compiling it. And once it is done it'll on-the-fly switch over to the optimised compiled code.
(PowerShell may be an even better fit than C# for this usage...)
-
@blinry
Yeah, I've often wondered about that myself. I understand that you can install the Sugar DE on Linux, generally, and get that "view source" button. But it seems specifically designed to oppose multitasking, too.@TerryHancock @blinry The idea of Sugar (apps full screen one at a time) in a sense is like Android. Suited to small screen which OLPC had. It's only good for certain kinds of workflow or browsing. I upgraded from 1 x QHD to 1 x 4K and then 2 x 4K and use the screens like a large desk. I need reference materials.
I used virtual desktops on 1600 x 1200 XP over 20 years ago. I hate full screen applications except watching video / movies.
I have a portable 17" QHD screen extending 11" laptop. -
(PowerShell may be an even better fit than C# for this usage...)
-
Good that the Powershell and dotNET teams already kinda split and opensourced themselves to avoid that
-
Remember the "One Laptop Per Child" project, that developed a low-cost computer for children in developing countries? I was always amazed by a certain feature: The "View Source" button.
When you pressed it, the source code for the currently running application would open. This was supposed to encourage tinkering with the software on your device!
I've been pondering what it would take to build that button on modern machines. Has anyone seen something like that?
(Prototype in next toot.)
@blinry That would bring up a million of lines, linked to a dozen of larger libraries, that in the end work only in a properly configured virtual environment.
IMHO any fun and clear didactics has ended since almost thirty years. -
Good that the Powershell and dotNET teams already kinda split and opensourced themselves to avoid that
Oh and if you've done anything with REST-APIs or transforming file formats (aka mapping objects and such) then PowerShell is definitely killing it.
That's where it shines and even outperforms python in my eyes. Everything else it is kinda on-pair with python. Except you actually get working explicit typing (should you want to explicitly type something)
+ interop with unmanaged code is easier.
-
@agowa338 @blinry Wasn't C# simply a MS repackage of MS J++, the MS version of Java, because they were sued by Sun?
Years ago I used to peer inside Java "jars" on XP and Ubuntu.I found C# far better than VB.net, but both inferior to VB6 for quick GUIs on SQL or simulating keypad and LCD of a microcontroller and prototyping the code.
Then I went back to RF design and mostly abandoned programming apart from JAL on PIC18.
But view source is very niche. You only want the overhead on a Dev's PC.@raymaccarthy @agowa338 @blinry not simply a repackage, it was a redesign from the ground up, trying to improve on the things Java aimed for but didn’t really achieve - and with some success
