virtualagc VS new-wave

I don't think that's a great example.

For instance, I can step through and even modify that code using tooling like AGC emulators like this one http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/#gsc.tab=0

What makes it open source is access to the same level of source access that the original developers worked in.

That's what's missing here. Mistral's engineers do not simply open this binary in their editor to do their job.

Glad you're enjoying the videos! I'm Mike from them. :) The Apollo 14 code I linked above was reconstructed in the same way as Luminary 69/2, but the process was far, far too involved for a video. Like I said above, I probably won't be much help with math, but I'd be more than happy to assist with finding documentation or navigating AGC code whenever you want!

The fact that all the information about the computer and software is public and you can verify it yourself like thousands of people have. https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/

If you’re curious about the the technical specs of the AGC check out Ron Burkey’s website, it’s even got the source code for you to see for yourself: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/

Of course you should be able to tell us because all the hardware architecture and software can be found here. So you must have fully reviewed it and located the issues. Right? Than please point out where the error is.

It had manually encoded ROM in the form of "core rope memory", which is pretty wacky, but it was a digital computer. In fact, it was the first IC computer.

You can learn way too much about it and even operate (a simulation of) one here: http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/

https://github.com/LAC-Tech/new-wave/blob/master/type.ml

Looks like my last attempt failed when I got bogged down prototyping a type system in Ocaml then trying to port that to Zig.

So in my case - it's not because I use them and they suck, it's because I find stuff like implementing type systems and GC very hard, and usually more practical things start wanting my attention more.