> Yes, though that weird stuff with dollars in it is not normal AArch64 assembly!

See the AT&T vs Intel syntax since you aren't familiar with assembly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_assembly_language#Syntax

That's an x86 thing, though.

There are more assembler dialects than I care to remember.

The 2A06 assembler that people who write NES code (and later on SNES/GB/etc) use has some real quirks: $ prefixes a literal hex value but % is binary, but # in front of that is an address, registers are baked into the opcode (ldx -> load into X), and more.

Playstation folks all just used MIPS dialects which are mostly AT&Tish but the PS2 used an Intel style assembler.

Nothing sexist in that quote, maybe have a break

Even Canonical themselves sobered up and abandoned their v3 recompilation effort as it showed no serious benefits.

Distros who went this path is going the way of the dinousaurs, together with their confused user base.

Possibly the click baity title combined with a basic lack of understanding of the topic. See sibling comment by milesvp.

> It's time for the next thing.

It's https://caniuse.com/wasm

mIRC

One should try to avoid using double negatives in both speech and programming to make intent more obvious ;-)

Human language is not math.

It needs to convey concepts that are infinitely variable rather than binary.

When a poet or novelist says something in an unusual way, they are being more accurate not less accurate. If there is ambiguity, it is because the concept or observation they mean to express has some ambiguous element.

Trying to avoid that is just downsampling analog color reality to a 200ppi 1bpp fax.

A related concept that even the most aspbergers STEM head should be able to understand, is how a scientist almost never asserts anything unequivocally. Almost every statement is qualified with whatever is appropriate to the context. Even the most fundamental constants of the universe like the speed of light are famously relative. Are those scientists being more or less ambiguous when they decline to say something simple and direct?

Everything they don't say is deliberate and carefully crafted to be as correct as possible, not some sloppy ommission.

The speed of light _is_ constant, how could it otherwise be a fundamental constant? I think you might have meant time/distance is relative?

Perhaps they're thinking of how it's dependent on the transmission material?

What is the definition of speed?

Except the ambiguity was the intent.

What a nonsensical conclusion. Homebrew existing is no reason for Apple to do replicate that trainwreck.

I thought it was clear from my comment that I was suggesting Apple would do it better. Think of how useful something like apt, npm, or pip is, and then realize that MacOS has no in-house equivalent.

Try them you'll love it :)