this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
519 points (95.8% liked)

linuxmemes

20761 readers
1856 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 113 points 1 year ago (16 children)

You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wrote a program that does nothing but busy loop on all cores. stylist_trend/Linux is my favourite OS.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i’m partial to the more relaxing sleep(500)/linux os, but to each their own

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Any good sleep will give back control to other threads.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

that’s why sleep(500)/linux uses bad sleep

load more comments (14 replies)