wain VS vim-mundo

I think SIMD was a distraction to our conversation, most code doesn't use it and in the future the length agnostic, flexible vectors; https://github.com/WebAssembly/flexible-vectors/blob/master/... are a better solution. They are a lot like RVV; https://github.com/riscv/riscv-v-spec, research around vector processing is why RISC-V exists in the first place!

I was trying to find the smallest Rust Wasm interpreters I could find, I should have read the source first, I only really use wasmtime, but this one looks very interesting, zero deps, zero unsafe.

16.5kloc of Rust https://github.com/rhysd/wain

The most complete wasm env for small devices is wasm3

20kloc of C https://github.com/wasm3/wasm3

I get what you are saying as to be so small that there isn't a place of bugs to hide.

> “There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult.” CAR Hoare

Even a 100 line program can't be guaranteed to be free of bugs. These programs need embedded tests to ensure that the layer below them is functioning as intended. They cannot and should not run open loop. Speaking of 300+ reimplementations, I am sure that RISC-V has already exceeded that. The smallest readable implementation is like 200 lines of code; https://github.com/BrunoLevy/learn-fpga/blob/master/FemtoRV/...

I don't think Wasm suffers from the base extension issue you bring up. It will get larger, but 1.0 has the right algebraic properties to be useful forever. Wasm does require an environment, for archival purposes that environment should be written in Wasm, with api for instantiating more envs passed into the first env. There are two solutions to the Wasm generating and calling Wasm problem. First would be a trampoline, where one returns Wasm from the first Wasm program which is then re-instantiated by the outer env. The other would be to pass in the api to create new Wasm envs over existing memory buffers.

See, https://copy.sh/v86/

MS-DOS, NES or C64 are useful for archival purposes because they are dead, frozen in time along with a large corpus of software. But there is a ton of complexity in implementing those systems with enough fidelity to run software.

Lua, Typed Assembly; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typed_assembly_language and Sector Lisp; https://github.com/jart/sectorlisp seem to have the right minimalism and compactness for archival purposes. Maybe it is sectorlisp+rv32+wasm.

If there are directions you would like Wasm to go, I really recommend attending the Wasm CG meetings.

https://github.com/WebAssembly/meetings

When it comes to an archival system, I'd like it to be able to run anything from an era, not just specially crafted binaries. I think Wasm meets that goal.

https://gist.github.com/dabeaz/7d8838b54dba5006c58a40fc28da9...

Hello guys i was looking at this project https://github.com/rhysd/wain and saw the c example from readme gif that converted c code to a wasm file and ran it. I tried reproducing that code in rust and when compiler and ran with wain it didnt print anything. Any suggestion on what im doing wrong? I created a cdylib and compiling to wasm32-unknown-unknown. Here is the c and rust code:

there's also telescope-undo and vim-mundo

I don't always need it, but when I do I find vim-mundo incredibly helpful. Understanding the vim undotree is hard without a visualization and mundo's ability to search my undo chunks makes it easy to revive some previous change that wasn't committed to version control.

Still using mundo here (https://github.com/simnalamburt/vim-mundo)

You mean undo/redo? that's u and . To view undos visually you can use a plugin like [vim-mundo](https://github.com/simnalamburt/vim-mundo

I'm glad you found something that works for you, and I don't mean to dissuade you even if I could, but to me that feels like an antipattern if you only use it for typed text.

Consider that with a text editor like Vim, for example, you can "time travel" [0] through your file's edits, or even have undo branches/trees [1][2] available per file. That saves you the trouble of having to transcribe text from screenshots, and also barely uses any storage space.

Plain text is also highly more portable and more likely to be recoverable in case of drive failure or file corruption.

Additionally, or alternatively, you could try any sort of manual versioning system or background automatic backup solution that keeps versions of files as you work on them.

[0]: https://vimtricks.com/p/vimtrick-time-travel-in-vim/

[1]: https://neovim.io/doc/user/undo.html#undo-tree

[2]: https://github.com/simnalamburt/vim-mundo

mundo undo tree

It's not just minutes either, you can do seconds with s, hours with h, days with d and get this - "writes" with w. You can also just simply go back to an arbitrary n number of buffer states before; but just like writes, that's hard to keep track of mentally and instead you should probably use a proper plugin for that.

I used to use Typora before I got into Neovim and realised that it wasn't free software either. Now I'm quite satisfied with my current setup, which uses: - aerial.nvim for header outline and navigation - run-code.nvim for running code blocks - vim-mundo for persistent undo history traversal (like Mac's time machine) - Prettier for auto-formatting Markdown as well as code blocks to their respective languages

Using a plugin like undotree (or Gundo, or Mundo) to visualize the edit history is by far the most practical solution to OP's problem, and I'm shocked you're the only person to suggest it.

There's a fork called mundo which has an inline diff mode that I'm a big fan of — https://github.com/simnalamburt/vim-mundo