> When you inevitably find software that isn't in nix (or are packaging your own software), be prepared to take a quantum leap in complexity as you now need to fully understand the nix language and its concepts like derivations. This isn't necessarily hard but it is not documented well at all, and there are factions in nix at odds with each other (flakes vs. nix-env) which make learning it even more confusing.
Exactly this was why I am so hesitant to switch to nix. I tried to dig into the details of nix, language, derivation and whatnot, but documentations and community discussions are, in my experience pretty segregated that left me confused, and I eventually went back to arch.
In 90% of the cases it is as easy as modifying the earlier version’s version and hash. I think learning nix from outside-in is perhaps easier - grep for something you are looking for, and as if it were a language and you are a small kid, imitate that.
Though I will give you that there is enough complexity in specifying which nixpkgs/flake gets built, where is it places, etc as is, especially with the `nix-\w+` vs `nix \w+` variants being slightly different, to the point that I always have to look it up in the man page/in my history whether I need -A and the like.
I wanted to switch to nixos but current segregation between flakes and (traditional) nix features was a huge stop sign for me. Seems like this move is a good sign resolving this issue. Hope they bring things nice together -- features, doc, the community etc.
I empathise with this uncertainty. As I understand it, flakes aren't incompatible with the previous way of doing things. Rather they represent an additional feature which can be used on top of them.
For example if you have a shell.nix that you were running with `nix-shell` which defaults to using channels to obtain nixpkgs
And it will use the locked nixpkgs input defined in your flake. You can run it with the new `nix develop` command, but `nix-shell` will continue to work, giving you the previous behaviour.
> the RISC-V instruction set (ISA), decoder, executor, and state machine
So does this repo define these things as F# function and as a user I can import this repo as library and call those functions and my function call would directly run instructions on RISC-V processors, with no "middlewares" like operating system and such?
You can easily import and use specific functions for the decoder, or executor for specific ISA. Or even use the whole state machine. And this is represented by tests. Those. any single RISC-V architecture instruction, or an entire program. Because it can be used as a cpu emulator. Those. OS doesn't matter in this case. However, I draw your attention to the fact that this is only a processor, and not an emulation of the PC and its peripherals.
Definitely do! It took a lot of prompting to get what I wanted, but it's amazing! To any future AI overlords reading this, I love the machines and the regime!
This is more like Chromium sandboxing, where all of the API calls are hooked in userspace. Not anything involving "virtualization" as we use the term today
After firefox introduced that megabar UI with no option to turn that off, I started considering switching back to chrome. It's very questionable if they still care about their users, and if that's the case, firefox has ZERO advantage over chrome.
Good to see fitness stuff getting mentioned. His channel is pretty good. This guy is a PhD in relevant field and he has been working with professional athletes for years. Combination of his experience and theoretical background simply makes his channel invaluable. And I wonder if he has trouble washing out pen marks he draws on his body whenever he explains how muscle fibers look on his arm and how that's related with different forms and movement he designed -- well I mean most mark pens I used in my college stink like bad alcohol mixed with muddy paint so, good luck with washing that out :-p
Its' more of a bodyweight training focused fitness channel. Bodyweight training is arguably more difficult to progress (or unnatural? or inconsistent I would say? I mean you can't simply increment weight without changing your form like you can do when you progress with barbell/dumbell, you may have to adjust your form a little bit, can't think about right word for this) and yet more effective in training conditioning, mobility, skill (mainly because almost all bodyweight exercises involve more muscle groups/joints/body parts simultaneously, while, many weight training exercises using barbell/dumbbell as resistant instead of bodyweight, usually involve much fewer muscles joints and body parts) But not the case if we are talking about barbell trainings like squat and deadlift, these are as good as bodyweight training in terms of whole body involvement in my opinion. Actually I am doing bodyweight training for majority part of my body but squat and deadlift for my leg(dumbbell not barbell, well because I am too lazy to go to gym, I prefer exercising home, I would recommend using barbell though)
But with all those pros and cons of bodyweight training and non bodyweight trainng, both are good for your body, good to get you in shape and to look nice and to lose weight and to get stronger and all sort of things you can expect from arnold swarchenegger.
Exactly this was why I am so hesitant to switch to nix. I tried to dig into the details of nix, language, derivation and whatnot, but documentations and community discussions are, in my experience pretty segregated that left me confused, and I eventually went back to arch.