mu VS single_file_libs

Depending on how minimal a distribution you want, a few years ago I had a way to take a single ELF binary created by my computing stack built up from machine code (https://github.com/akkartik/mu) and package it up with just a linux kernel and syslinux (whatever _that_ is) to create a bootable disk image I could then ship to a cloud server (https://akkartik.name/post/iso-on-linode, though I don't use Linode anymore these days) and run on a VPS to create a truly minimal webserver. If this seems at all relevant I'd be happy to answer questions or help out.

This was the thinking behind my https://github.com/akkartik/mu

Yes thank you, I was indeed alluding to https://github.com/akkartik/mu. Perhaps a more precise term would be "software stack".

I built a computer with its own languages, and I consider it to be _less_ cognitive load when everything is in 1/2/3 languages. I don't have to worry that the next program I want to read the sources will require "Go, Rust, C++, JS/TS, Python, Java, etc."

There are other metrics to consider besides your notions of cognitive load and productivity. Inferno predates most of the languages on your list. My computer (https://github.com/akkartik/mu) uses custom languages because I was able to design them to minimize total LoC, and to ensure the dependency graph has no cycles (unlike all of the conventional software stack, at least until https://www.gnu.org/software/mes connects up all the dots).

"Separation of concerns is a hard-won insight."

Absolutely. I'm arguing for separating just concerns, without entangling them with considerations of people.

It's certainly reasonable to consider my projects toy. I consider them research:

* https://github.com/akkartik/mu

* https://github.com/akkartik/teliva

"The idea that projects should take source copies instead of library dependencies is just kind of nuts..."

The idea that projects should take copies seems about symmetric to me with taking pointers. Call by value vs call by reference. We just haven't had 50 years of tooling to support copies. Where would we be by now if we had devoted equal resources to both branches?

"...at least for large libraries."

How are these large libraries going for ya? Log4j wasn't exactly a shining example of the human race at its best. We're trying to run before we can walk.

I still believe :) I'm looking not for an economic argument but for a strategic one. I think[1] a self-hosted setup with minimal dependencies can be more resilient than a conventional one, whether with a vendor or self-hosted.

https://sandstorm.io got a lot right. I wish they'd paid more attention to upgrade burdens.

[1] https://github.com/akkartik/mu

This was my attempt at providing easy graphics to kids inspired by the BBC Micro: https://github.com/akkartik/mu/tree/main/shell

Here's a 6-minute demo: https://archive.org/details/akkartik-mu-2021-06-09

Requires Qemu, though. And no sound yet, unfortunately. I'd love contributions there or elsewhere.

Thanks for all the quotes. This one's my favorite of them, I think. I've chatted with you in the past, and I think we largely see eye to eye. I love LP! I still use it. Here's an x86 VM I maintained for several years: https://github.com/akkartik/mu/tree/main/linux/bootstrap. This (old) essay is merely thoughts on _how_ to do LP. We have some disagreement there, but I hope you'll agree that it's mild in the large scheme of things.

Yep: https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs

Also sometimes I use only header (.h) with all functions included wrapped by #ifndef and #endif. When I use these? for code that I always reuse to simplify things and some data stucture handling (to implement dynamic arrays). A good example list of these (not mine) are https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs

Also, there are many libraries that are much bigger (little list I found) but are implemented in a single header file.

> Like, why don't we just let projects be "done"? Things don't need to be maintained and updated for eternity.

This is generally why I opt for "single-file" libraries that do one simple task well. The smaller the library, the more likely it is "done". For example, do I want some insanely complex image library that handles every file format under the sun, or do I just want some basic one that allows me to output a simple JPEG?

I often find myself referring to "single_file_libs" repository: https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs

Looking at the open issues, it doesn't appear to be actively maintained but it's still an incredibly good resource for "completed" projects.

Steamworks is the easy option, but if you're programming-savvy you could also use a networking library (some lists for C and C++: 1 2 3) to accomplish the same thing.

Have a look at these. https://github.com/nothings/single_file_libs#geometry-file