Re: Source Code for OS?

[olcott <olcott@qwest.net>]

Roy and/or Janet Miller wrote:

> olcott wrote:
>
> > Roy and/or Janet Miller wrote:
> >
> > > Quantum_Cat wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hiya, Cooter.
> > > >
> > > > I'll take Roy's advice and try to trim this post.
> > >
> > > Thanks for trying.
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > >
> > > >  *>The broadest field that I have ever applied this to is the derivation of a
> > > >  *>computer language compiler that produces mathematically optimal
> > > >  *>translations.
> > >
> > > I'm surprised QC that you didn't do what I'm going to do: Ok braggart - what's the
> > > name of this superior compiler?
> > >
> >
> > 2point5GL its a cross between "C" and assember.
> >
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > >
> > > >  *>Given an infinite amount of time, no one could ever produce a compiler that
> > > >  *>would be the slightest trace better than the translations that my compiler
> > > >  *>produced.
> > >
> > > QC, you let me down again. olcott, it took me almost 15 minutes to stop laughing
> > > after reading this. So then superboy, let's hear what this infallible compiler is
> > > called, who markets it, and what platforms is it available on? Wow, I'm so impressed
> > > to be arguing with the greatest programmer in the world, one that no one can best,
> > > one who has produced infallible systems. You must work for Microsoft, right?
> > >
> >
> > Ah so rudeness is a part of your spiritual walk?
> > The one whom is so arrogant as to call himself
> > a professional theologian, while Christ himself
> > was an amateur
>
> 1. Christ wasn't an amateur

The distinction between professional and amateur is most
typically made on the basis of whether one received monetary
compensation for there work.

>
> 2. I'm not the one who claimed to have written a compiler that the greatest living
> programmers, with an infinite amount of time couldn't surpass
> 3. You still haven't answered the question - who publishes it, what platforms does it work
> on, and, by the way, what journals have reviewed this wondersoft, and validated your
> incredible claims.
> 4. My statements are rude - if you are telling the truth. If you are just a gas bag, as
> you posts suggest, then all that has happened is you've been shown, once again, and not
> just by me, to be wearing no imperial robes.
>

There is NO EXCUSE for one whose "profession"
is speaking for God to ever be rude. My compiler
does produce mathematically optimal code. I have
worked on it for several years. As it turns out the
distinction between the mathematically optimal code
that it produces and the code produced by other
compilers is of little practical consequence, decreasing
size, and time by less than one percent. Yet this
difference is required to distinguish between
actual perfection, and a mere reasonable facsimile.
A Pastor whom does not bother to incorporate
the teachings of Christ into his life? This seems
to me to be a sham...

>
> Roy