<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gales Scheme</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/</link>
	<description>The search for invariants</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 16:38:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://polimedia.us</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: The simplest way yet to fetch Bitcoin code &#171; Fixpoint</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-1959</link>
		<dc:creator>The simplest way yet to fetch Bitcoin code &#171; Fixpoint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2022 00:20:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-1959</guid>
		<description>[...] - Gales Scheme interpreter, used by [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] - Gales Scheme interpreter, used by [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gales Bitcoin Wallet (re)release &#171; Fixpoint</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-1721</link>
		<dc:creator>Gales Bitcoin Wallet (re)release &#171; Fixpoint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2021 19:13:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-1721</guid>
		<description>[...] An atrophied sort of introduction to Gales Scheme, the interpreter used by the offline signing progr... [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] An atrophied sort of introduction to Gales Scheme, the interpreter used by the offline signing progr... [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob Welsh</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-340</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob Welsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2020 07:33:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-340</guid>
		<description>A new bugfix patch is at: &lt;a href="/v/gscm/gscm_immutable_fill.vpatch" rel="nofollow"&gt;gscm_immutable_fill.vpatch&lt;/a&gt;, explanations enclosed. Also I have corrected the omission of signatures from the patches mentioned in footnote iii.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new bugfix patch is at: <a href="/v/gscm/gscm_immutable_fill.vpatch" rel="nofollow">gscm_immutable_fill.vpatch</a>, explanations enclosed. Also I have corrected the omission of signatures from the patches mentioned in footnote iii.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob Welsh</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-334</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob Welsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2020 22:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-334</guid>
		<description>By "complete" I mean missing no essentials. By "self-sufficient" I mean requiring nothing outside the system for its own maintenance and further development. (Since the system in question consists of code, I suppose it's understood that things like people or factories or electricity aren't in the domain that's excluded there.)

There's a lot of "to be determined" in the details of what is essential. But I am convinced that there is indeed a gap between that and "everything". I use the systems I do because they provide things I need, not because I need all the parts they come with (and each of those in at least half a dozen flavors with their subtle interactions and incompatibilities). They're like a clock built from a thousand tiny gears, complete with the necessary-apparently mechanisms to oil them all. I'm after knowing the time, and believe it can be had with but a fraction of the clockwork.

Not sure if I'm just dancing around your question though.

&lt;blockquote&gt;a retreat in and a retracing of the more familiar ways is still at core exactly the same.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Thanks for spelling it out. There's been retracing indeed but perhaps greater awareness of the costs of the familiar ways even as there is comfort in the indulgence. For instance, not having a well-oiled and listened-to system for determining what happens when, means I can't trust that something will get done at all if saved for later, which creates a sense of "must be done *right now* if it's not to be dropped", which means that whatever best intentions I start the day with, of what to do or how much time to spend, don't stand a chance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By "complete" I mean missing no essentials. By "self-sufficient" I mean requiring nothing outside the system for its own maintenance and further development. (Since the system in question consists of code, I suppose it's understood that things like people or factories or electricity aren't in the domain that's excluded there.)</p>
<p>There's a lot of "to be determined" in the details of what is essential. But I am convinced that there is indeed a gap between that and "everything". I use the systems I do because they provide things I need, not because I need all the parts they come with (and each of those in at least half a dozen flavors with their subtle interactions and incompatibilities). They're like a clock built from a thousand tiny gears, complete with the necessary-apparently mechanisms to oil them all. I'm after knowing the time, and believe it can be had with but a fraction of the clockwork.</p>
<p>Not sure if I'm just dancing around your question though.</p>
<blockquote><p>a retreat in and a retracing of the more familiar ways is still at core exactly the same.</p></blockquote>
<p>Thanks for spelling it out. There's been retracing indeed but perhaps greater awareness of the costs of the familiar ways even as there is comfort in the indulgence. For instance, not having a well-oiled and listened-to system for determining what happens when, means I can't trust that something will get done at all if saved for later, which creates a sense of "must be done *right now* if it's not to be dropped", which means that whatever best intentions I start the day with, of what to do or how much time to spend, don't stand a chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Diana Coman</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-332</link>
		<dc:creator>Diana Coman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2020 19:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-332</guid>
		<description>Well, my question ended up as broad as that for the very simple reason that I couldn't figure out anything *narrower* from your article above. So coming at it from the other end then, the other way to ask this would be what do you mean then to re-write in Scheme? What does that "enabling all of the accreted layers of software and hardware sludge - historical, modern and postmodern - to be safely jettisoned" even mean and how is it really a less blank cheque than what my first question clearly points out?

&lt;blockquote&gt;
I have some guesses but I'd rather ask - how do you mean?
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
For the simplest part, whether in the green &#38; break or in picking up an older project, a retreat in and a retracing of the more familiar ways is still at core exactly the same. At best, it can turn out to be perhaps not a closed loop though but more like part of an upwards spiral, there is that to be said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, my question ended up as broad as that for the very simple reason that I couldn't figure out anything *narrower* from your article above. So coming at it from the other end then, the other way to ask this would be what do you mean then to re-write in Scheme? What does that "enabling all of the accreted layers of software and hardware sludge - historical, modern and postmodern - to be safely jettisoned" even mean and how is it really a less blank cheque than what my first question clearly points out?</p>
<blockquote><p>
I have some guesses but I'd rather ask - how do you mean?
</p></blockquote>
<p>For the simplest part, whether in the green &amp; break or in picking up an older project, a retreat in and a retracing of the more familiar ways is still at core exactly the same. At best, it can turn out to be perhaps not a closed loop though but more like part of an upwards spiral, there is that to be said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob Welsh</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-330</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob Welsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2020 05:41:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-330</guid>
		<description>I reckon it took me a bit to respond here because the question pulled in a number of vaguely remembered and partially digested threads. Found one to reread that involved good houses and clothes being made for a specific person. But meanwhile:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Does this mean you plan to re-write everything in Scheme?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

What a blank check that would be! No, and that doesn't strike me as possible, or even desirable. As always, he who wants to play Mario should buy the Nintendo or run the emulator. Now, whether it's my thing that ends up the toy while "real business" happens by Excel spreadsheet, or the other way around, is a question. It would depend on finding a viable niche, and/or getting some network effect going.

&lt;blockquote&gt;On a side note, there seem to be some similarities between golf and older code projects even!&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I have some guesses but I'd rather ask - how do you mean?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I reckon it took me a bit to respond here because the question pulled in a number of vaguely remembered and partially digested threads. Found one to reread that involved good houses and clothes being made for a specific person. But meanwhile:</p>
<blockquote><p>Does this mean you plan to re-write everything in Scheme?</p></blockquote>
<p>What a blank check that would be! No, and that doesn't strike me as possible, or even desirable. As always, he who wants to play Mario should buy the Nintendo or run the emulator. Now, whether it's my thing that ends up the toy while "real business" happens by Excel spreadsheet, or the other way around, is a question. It would depend on finding a viable niche, and/or getting some network effect going.</p>
<blockquote><p>On a side note, there seem to be some similarities between golf and older code projects even!</p></blockquote>
<p>I have some guesses but I'd rather ask - how do you mean?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Diana Coman</title>
		<link>http://jfxpt.com/2020/gales-scheme/#comment-329</link>
		<dc:creator>Diana Coman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2020 09:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/?p=127#comment-329</guid>
		<description>Does this mean you plan to re-write everything in Scheme?

On a side note, there seem to be some similarities between golf and older code projects even!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does this mean you plan to re-write everything in Scheme?</p>
<p>On a side note, there seem to be some similarities between golf and older code projects even!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
