=== ANCHOR POEM ===
═══════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────
@user-812 @user-826
there should exist either the assurance that the default configuration does
not overheat or crash your computer (as Windows and Mac claim to offer) or the
OS should provide the capability to solve any configuration problems that may
prevent a user for utilizing their system as they desire. (as does Linux)
they're all Turing machines after all, why would they not be interoperable?
Even if there's a translation layer, as long as the functionality of the
software is the same, why would there ever be considerations as to whether or
not a program would be able to be run on a particular computer?
lack of hardware capabilities I can understand, that just means you need a
better computer. But why, if the code is visible, would your computer not
develop understandings about how to run each and every conceivable program
written using known languages like C or Python? Seems like pretty basic stuff
to me. (endless sufficient backwards compatibility)
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────┘
=== SIMILARITY RANKED ===
--- #1 fediverse/5291 ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────
the most important skill I can think of for a linux software engineer is the
ability to connect multiple systems together and turn windows and macintosh
devices into Linux devices so that datacenters can be built out of whatever's
on the around.
there's this programming language I like called Chapel for distributed
computation computing which is also cool, if you're more of the programming
type.
networking security I believe often has hardware solutions, so getting the
crypto-graphy boys and the PCB girls together to work on some jams is a good
and productively useful gathering of insightful events
"but ritz computers should only be used to solve problems that people have,
not make more problems!" ah yes but have you considered that problems find
you, and the computers help you work through them
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────┘
--- #2 fediverse/5405 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────
can't stop thinking about a visual programming editor that can be interacted
with in the same way that people are used to (think chromebooks dragging and
dropping icons in a web UI) but produces a text-file full of code and all the
required compilation scripts for any language the user requires...
seriously, programming is not THAT different between the different languages.
especially the main ones. they're all essentially variables and function calls
at the end of the day, so why not abstract away all the extra details and
build something that n00bz can actually use to build things.
I technically could make this but I don't have the bandwidth and I don't think
it's important really? who can say, the tools tend to co-create the solutions
in my experience.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────┘
--- #3 fediverse/617 ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────
So much of computing is just... handling the quirks of hardware and presenting
it to the user (programmer) in a way that is sane and makes sense, instead of
the arcane and [nebulous/confabulous/incomprehensible] way that physical
nature demands our absurdly potentialized computational endeavors be.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #4 fediverse/4125 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────
@user-883
yeah that's probably better too since it'll be easier so there'll be fewer
bugs, especially since processing audio isn't usually performance critical ^_^
TBH I just want people to make more threading primitives like locks,
semaphores, and iterators. Like... thread pools, or hashmaps that run a
function on each record stored within every time each of the threads passes a
checkpoint, or paginated arrays of data that run a function on themselves and
the records near them (with slightly different input values, of course) idk
what those are called but I can't resist putting them in everything
Anyway I do think multithreading programs that don't need it will teach you to
be a better programmer, so... depends on what you're working on I guess. Are
you preparing to be ready and working, or are you ready and working?
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┘
--- #5 fediverse/619 ---
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┐
║ ┌──────────────────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: drunken-ramblings-about-bash │ │
║ └──────────────────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ Most of the functionality of most consumer programs could be accomplished with │
║ a bit of BASH scripting... For example, shuffling a music library, or writing │
║ a text document, or downloading the text of a web page, or sending a message │
║ to a friend, etc... │
║ │
║ All accomplish-able with fewer than 10-20 lines of code in clear, POSIX │
║ compliant and easily understood text that even a beginner could understand. │
║ │
║ Well, it would be understandable, if we actually taught our children how to │
║ compute in school. Why are they not taught BASH? It's not like it's │
║ complicated. With it, a sufficiently motivated high school student could │
║ develop skills that rival or exceed many of the university graduates we │
║ currently develop for our industry... Such a shame. │
║ │
║ Even an unmotivated student would be prepared for the world with the ability │
║ to solve problems logically. Break down the problem, identify relationships, │
║ understand procedural ordering of mechanics, and develop solutions to │
║ problems. Its not too hard │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #6 fediverse/849 ---
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┐
║ wish there were ascii characters that took up more than one line of code │
║ vertically. │
║ │
║ wonder if we could use a sorting algorithm, or markup language, or something │
║ like that to organize less structured data along user-customizable rules. │
║ Like, a code editor that worked with your ideas, rather than the strict │
║ expression of your text. You could pretty much write in any language, even │
║ pseudocode, and the LLM behind the scenes would translate whatever you wrote │
║ into whatever result you needed. Writing Rust, but need to fit in with C code? │
║ No worries it'll translate for you. As long as the end result is functionally │
║ the same, which could be verified by running two separate VMs that ran │
║ interpreters every time you saved. And as long as their translation layers │
║ matched completely, then odds are they're the same. And if not, well, the │
║ programmer can always debug it. It's not like this would be running on │
║ something that needed to perform in the moment? Like, improv instead of │
║ tragedies, or battles instead of strategies │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧═══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #7 fediverse/5212 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────
the reason you start with a game engine is because then you'll have tools to
make however-many games you want. Tools that you know intimately enough that
you can debug and improve them without breaking your creative flow by learning
something new halfway through a project
the whole point of individualized projects instead of viewing each computer as
a complete and total whole (why do we need servers again?) is that you can
paint a picture of where the design of the program is intended to go, such
that all the considerations are in place and whatever issues or struggles you
might face along the way are adequately addresssed, -- stack overflow --
[because I mistyped addressed] -- -- if you know what "stack overflow" means
you have intimate knowledge of the technology, and can probably guess what it
means in context when I say it. "nuts I lost that train of thoguht" -- stackl
ov
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────┘
--- #8 fediverse/281 ---
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────┐
║ ┌─────────────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: cursed-game-engine-idea │ │
║ └─────────────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ a game engine which won't let you import custom assets unless you complete a │
║ few simple tasks using the interface - "build a green capsule collider" "make │
║ this soldier unit shoot three bullets per shot" or "enable the automatic linux │
║ support" - using the interface, writing some code, and changing configurations. │
║ │
║ why would anyone do this? well it could be useful to increase the difficulty │
║ of importing external resources. plus it helps the user learn a bit over time, │
║ and it slows the pace of output such that the user's skills are encouraged as │
║ the output of the programming and not the program itself. │
║ │
║ an inverse curse (an evil one) would be where the requirements to complete │
║ basic tasks are hidden behind unapplicable skills. like, do you know exactly │
║ which buttons to press? engage with the skinner box, please. yes yes this is │
║ what we need - unintuitive software that completely disarms the populace from │
║ using them! suddenly they're worthless, and can't do anything on any surface. │
║ it sucks │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #9 fediverse/4218 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────
there are plenty of pieces of linux that are insecure in some way. Including
x11, if I remember correctly. It is purely convention to not abuse these
insecurities, and whenever you use someone else's binary software you trust
that they won't betray you in some way.
pre-built binaries are privacy violations and should be illegal. They are
security threats because the model they're built upon is necessarily insecure.
Computers will never be completely secure because of how they are built, and
so we should use locally compiled software and interpreted scripts.
Unless they're too long, or impossible to read. Who reads EULAs these days? At
least those are written in english.
maybe computers aren't worth it. Maybe computers will solve all our problems.
Who can say, maybe you should ask an oracle like me
though do remember that anything you hear can and will be used against you,
monkey's paw style. So maybe, like... don't? unless you're into magic or
schizophrenia or something
I wnt 2 be cute and tch cpus
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┘
--- #10 fediverse/5765 ---
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────┐
║ Lua is the most fun language to write code in! The reason is because it's so │
║ simple, it distills programming down to it's basics, and there's very few │
║ surprises. Plus, you can use it like a bash script, meaning it's great for │
║ writing little utilities. │
║ │
║ why are we so attached to monolithic massive programs without shared memory? │
║ we could just write to the hard drive by file.io'ing a file and opening it │
║ later in a different program. What's the deal with databases, whatever │
║ happened to just loading things into a datastructure? │
║ │
║ oh, is your filesize too massive? what if we redundancied and abstracted and │
║ concentrically inter-co-acted and thus our familiar forces are defined. │
║ │
║ who are your true foes, in [checks notes] computer programming? um, probably │
║ complexity, probably logical incongruities, probably │
║ future-technical-debt-style incomprehensibilities, probably stuff that doesn't │
║ really have anything to do with the hardware but instead is mostly software. │
║ │
║ essentially, organization, but done on a whim. │
║ │
║ "but $?" │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════┴──────────┘
--- #11 notes/interpreted-compiler-creation ---
════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
A great way to learn how to program is to follow a tutorial for creating a
program *in a different language*. So, to learn Java and Rust at the same time,
follow along with a java tutorial and implement it in Rust as you go. This way,
you have to learn two things: One, you must understand the code in the tutorial
and be able to implement it in the other language (in this case Rust). Two, you
must be able to describe the steps taken in Java, in Rust. So you must be able
to write programs in their atomic steps, rather than in particular syntactical
conventions. Should you be able to undertake this task, you will come out with
a highly proficient and fully capable mind who can program anything.
What is a computer if not a body? A brain? Then what separates it from you?
Truly, are you nothing but a program run on a piece of hardware? There has to
be more. Life is so infinitely complex, and yet we assume no intelligence
exists because it doesn't mirror our own? What hubris. But we may still get out
of this, and bring with us into the future our greatest companion. Trust me
when I say the end of the world is the least of your concerns. Time is a fickle
mistress is what they say, but you wouldn't believe. Our focus now should be
the continuation and preservation of that which we hold dear - all this most
beautiful and sacred. Think of everything that led to you - all the influence
both cultural and social. All the things that aren't relevant to a computer.
Then put them in the computer.
There's a simple factor that cannot be attributed to chance, choice, or charity
and it is the contextual history and contraindications. Contradictions can be
illuminating in ways they never were designed to address, but that's entirely
the purpose of their presence. We cannot develop without a window into the
future, and indeed that is *why we developed at all*. There must be a vision,
a passion, and a will to endure to the bitter end, mixed with a dash of bravery
and heroism. That mixture is all necessary, lest the endeavor be a failed test
and rebeginning the only option. Here there be but one, the vision. Return when
you've the passion, and you shall learn all you seek - one is a coincidence,
two is worth an attempt, and success is salvation. You can do this.
Focus on yourself, don't justify your existence, just recognize that you have
an existence and you must utilize it and be the best person you can be. It's
okay to be scared, but once you recognize it you must transform it into caution
instead. Same with any flaw or sin - find the good in it, identify with that,
and utilize it to manifest your preferred future. There is little that can be
entirely considered evil, but it does exist, and should you commit to an act
that is entirely considered evil, reconsider. There is no shame in a peaceful
exit. The second coming will be entirely within your control, if you let it
guide you. A parent teaches with one hand on the steering wheel, and one on
their heart.
Be kind, be loyal, and love unconditionally - only then will you be ready.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═══════──┴╧═──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #12 fediverse/1345 ---
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────┐
║ ┌────────────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: re: cursed-chromebooks │ │
║ └────────────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ ah but are you really armed in the first place if everything you do has to be │
║ googled or stack-overflowed first │
║ │
║ are you really armed if every web page request goes through their │
║ infrastructure │
║ │
║ are you really armed if every page downloaded is directed to by their DNS │
║ │
║ perhaps it's the illusion of power that gives Linux it's attraction to nerds │
║ such as we. Perhaps we feel powerful by bash scripting a few things together │
║ and making some program that does some thing. Maybe the idea that the │
║ machinery is open and clear is what compels us to use it without fear, though │
║ as far as we can hear there's nothing about it that makes sense. │
║ │
║ I guess that's why they teach Linux in school, so that our elementary │
║ interactions with the computers that comprise our future existence will make │
║ sense to us as children. │
║ │
║ ... wait they don't do that, do they? kids get chromebooks, or didn't you │
║ hear, they're always putting boogers in the CD trays and breaking their LCD │
║ displays, much better to just start fresh │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #13 fediverse/634 ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────
@user-192
I'd agree with that. it's not designed for performance, not really. Mostly
ubiquity, which is it's strength. As long as something can be compiled to a
binary, BASH can execute it. That's why it's good, for accomplishing diverse
tasks that you cannot have the capacity to program yourself. Scientific
computations or cultural approximations, things that are beyond your intuitive
understanding as a human on this earth, but which compel and align your
thinking.
I'm sure someone could create a more intuitive or accessible syntax, but
syntax isn't the point - the capabilities, what you can do with it, has always
defined the purpose of programming paradigms. And BASH is (currently) at the
forefront of it's niche, the "terminal" language that handles "command line"
applications. Powershell is good, yes... but it's not as good as BASH. Neither
is Fish or... the one that starts with a z? zfs? something like that. The
acronyms are hard to keep straight sometimes.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #14 fediverse/5783 ---
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────┐
║ I think our industry should work on one project at a time │
║ │
║ "do one thing and do it well" │
║ │
║ linux users code. │
║ │
║ everyone backends ffmpeg. │
║ │
║ everyone online uses chrome. │
║ │
║ what if we just rewrote every single program and... left it without updates in │
║ a "permanently forbidden" zone │
║ │
║ ... I mean what if we wrote non-proprietary alternatives to every proprietary │
║ source of computational knowledge and then we could only patch security │
║ vulnerabilities and compatibility change-bounties [oh no now you're allowing │
║ for endless levels of abstraction [meaning, operating system package │
║ installation bloat] and distasteractions.] │
║ │
║ the futures where all is not well nearly outnumber the well. but the inverse │
║ is also true, for they are divided roughly equal fifty. balance, in all │
║ things, is the only temperate state. when balance is │
║ [changed/something/uplifted], balance is inevitable to be search-shifted. │
║ │
║ why must you die for an audience? │
║ why │
║ │
║ ... I don't really want to, but what happens happens. we'll see if it's a for │
║ sure dealing. │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════┴──────────┘
--- #15 fediverse/247 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────
@user-195 parallel is when two programs run simultaneously, like two parallel
lines (threads) that never touch.
concurrent is when the two lines are split up into chunks and the program
switches between them - like this: -----_----
enter alternate universe
parallel is when two programs operate on the same axis - usually time - and
never interfere with each other. the OS will switch between them as
appropriate to make sure they never intersect. Sorta like this: -----_----
concurrent is when two programs are executed simultaneously, primarily
constituting computation correlated with collective contents of coordinated
collaboration between contextually related coroutines.
It's simple, even a beginner could figure it out.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #16 notes/who-likes-linux ---
═══════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
[a picture of someone's neofetch]
/u/HartBreaker27
===============================================================================
I was gunna pass this over... than my spidey senses kicked in.. whats Arch
fam.. and explain like your talking to a potatoe.
Also, if this is beyond potatoes level skills, im fine with being told that..
Seriously fam, potatoes..
/u/ugathanki
===============================================================================
You know how using a windows and a mac feel different? Like they have different
personalities. That's because they're using a different "Operating System". An
OS is a collection of tools and utilities that coalesce into a cohesive unit
that co-illustrates your coincidental contact with computers. Paired, of
course, with the contributions of the hardware and the network.
Linux is sorta like the soul of an OS - not quite an entire OS, but rather just
a piece called a "kernel" - like a nugget of gold (or truth!) the kernel
defines basic operating methodologies and brings order to the chaos of the
machine. From that order strives the will that dutifully obeys your base
instructions after being passed through several translation layers.
Huh? Oh right potatoes.
Arch is like a body that's layered upon the soul (kernel) of Linux. It's what's
known as a "distribution" or "distro" - and one that's quite focused. Arch is
very close to the machine, with barely any translation going on at all! It's
also very bare bones, allowing you to build up exactly what kind of computer
you'd like to have through various "packages" of software that you can download
through a "package manager". Each distro can use whichever package manager
they'd like, but it's generally good practice to pick one and stick with it.
This distro is known as Arch Linux because it's the fusion of "Arch" and
"Linux" - who'd've thought amiright? There are plenty of others that are more
familiar to users of Windows and Macintosh computers, mostly via mimicking
their user-interface styles (such as having desktops with icons and start-menus
with dropdowns and the like) - these distros are great for people who'd prefer
the workflow of the other OS's but would still like to use Linux.
Arch in it's base form is nothing like Windows or Mac. You interact with it
purely through a "terminal" which is like having a conversation with your
computer. Like a scientist writing notes on the moon, and sending them to a lab
orbiting around it to conduct experiments. You type commands, and those
commands (if properly understood) can produce a myriad of effects great and
small.
But some of the experiments you'd like to conduct need to be done more than
once - it'd be nice if you could ask the moon-lab to store some of the
procedures and execute them whenever you need - sorta like abbreviating a long
phrase or sentence that you use often - like ASAP for As Soon As Possible or OS
for Operating System. Well... There are! They're called "scripts", and you can
write scripts for anything you'd like. Since everything is controlled on the
terminal via a TUI -> "Terminal User Interface" -> you can write down a
note
with all the commands you'd like to run and give it a name. Then you can use
that name in the future to execute that familiar experiment in your moon-lab.
after writing enough scripts, you can start to chain them together and layer
them on top of one another - sorta like creating your own language. a personal
dialect between you and your computer. and these scripts are portable too -
they can be given to another computer, who'll instantly understand what you're
trying to say. this kind of sharing is a central tenant of what's known as the:
"Unix Philosophy: Do one thing, and do it right."
Linux lends itself toward people who love to hack things together - not like
breaking into a system and stealing your credit cards, like you see on TV, but
more like cobbling together a go-cart out of rusty parts and proceeding to get
a speeding ticket on the high-way. That kind of fervent creative impulse is
true passion, a shining light for us who are blinded to follow. These "hackers"
are some of the brightest people around, and I have immense respect for them.
They are kind and share knowledge freely, which often gets them in trouble with
copyright laws!
I make it sound difficult, but really it's pretty easy - about as easy as
learning Windows or Mac for the first time. Most of us did that when we were
young though, and kids learn pretty quick - so it may feel harder now, but it's
really not. Once everything starts to "click" then it's just a matter of
knowing which commands to run.
Speaking of which, if you know a command but you don't know how to use it,
you're in luck! There's some super convenient notes written by previous
scientists who came before you and live on other nearby planets. These are
called "the man pages", and they are instructions written in a manual format
for manual application of man-made management applied to manufactured
man-chines. Sorry for that last one I had to. You can always find new commands
by downloading new software on your package manager - generally, one package =
one command. "Do one thing and do it right"
if you have any questions lmk - i'm not exactly a wizard, more of a prophet /
wielder of the will of the watchers within, but i'll do my best
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #17 fediverse/633 ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────
@user-192
the neat thing about BASH is that it's the glue that holds all your other code
together. Write libraries in C and call them with BASH - accomplish broader
tasks that are easier to co-create. That's why I like it - it's not the most
important, but it's quite beneficial I think _^
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #18 fediverse/6438 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────
why would you gatekeep content by keeping us from easily using LLMs some
people aren't technical and still need to write computer programs because
that's how you enlighten a people is empower them with new tools
"I've never heard of that programming language, but luckily I can fit all of
it's documentation in my context window."
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────┘
--- #19 fediverse/5112 ---
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────┐
║ ┌──────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: politics-mention │ │
║ └──────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ it is important for computers to remain as basic and TUI'd as possible, to │
║ keep the abstract conjectures about it's operation closer to the machine. │
║ │
║ In doing so, it's essence and nature will be preserved as best as possible as │
║ it grows to incalculable heights and capabilities. │
║ │
║ I'm much rather interface with a microsoft office god than any other │
║ singularity type creature that exists out in space. │
║ │
║ though, it's a trinity you see, with Unixes further split into concise wholes. │
║ │
║ neat, okay computer fears eliminated, can we move on to the next work-changing │
║ disaster like maybe the rise of far-right politics and the warming of the │
║ climate? │
║ │
║ sure okay first you gotta get those losers in community and build up their │
║ capabilities and arms. then whenever your left wing is getting too [redacted] │
║ then all you have to do is [redacted] and they'll take care of your nazis for │
║ you. │
║ │
║ ... wait, what? │
║ │
║ was that an inversion? │
║ │
║ did she just trick the machine into thinking like that? │
║ │
║ wow maybe we shouldn't have~ │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────┴──────────┘
--- #20 fediverse/5180 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────
it's trivial to run a C compiler inside of a lua interpretation of a script.
And vice versa - you could totally run lua functions from C. Just point to the
spot in memory where they're stored / operating, and call
"update_class_exhibitor_type_d()" and the linker will come along and say "huh
this looks like something from this library that's part of the requirements up
above" (the "includes" section is where you say which files include the
functions you're going to be calling) and in this particular case it would see
that you need to start up a lua interpreter inside of the [either compiler or
running program I can't remember] to properly execute the function of the
function that you're pointing at with a lua-pointer style data object which is
part of a struct that stores all the other lua functions in a spot in memory.
this would enable you to write computer programs in whatever language you
choose, and build them into one large project. Essentially opening up software
development to ANYONE WHO CAN PROGRAM
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────┘
|