@Rahul2001 You have two questions 1/ asking people to vote for the bot to stay and 2/ for the bot to go. That mean one of your questions will always win (unless the vote is the same for both).
This also means that is you are going to call a batch file which annoys you because it has an exit command at the end, you can run cmd before calling it
@oldmud0 Note that the Queen would still have to agree. "The monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the royal prerogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet, but in practice would only do so in emergencies or where existing precedent does not adequately apply to the circumstances in question."
@BenN Yes. There is nothing to stop parliament passing a motion that seeks to instruct the PM not to trigger article 50.
@BenN The PM is also free to ignore the referendum results.
The European Union Referendum Act 2015 makes no provision for the result to be legally binding on the government or on any future government due to the principle of parliamentary sovereignty although the decision will be final.
So that means they can ignore the results but they can't hold another referendum hoping for different results.
@oldmud0 probably because running a virtual machine within the kernel is wastefully slow. You can already compile no less than three kernels (*BSD, Linux, and XNU) with an LLVM-based compiler, but it emits native code. Is that an "LLVM OS"?
the kernel is a pretty frequently used path for system calls for things like disk I/O, networking and IPC... you can't just start adding thick overhead layers on top of that and expect to compete with existing kernels.
the very concept makes little sense. if you have LLVM-generated IL for a kernel, you want to precompile it to native code with an IL to native assembler and linker for maximum performance.
JIT compiling it doesn't help anybody, it only has disadvantages.
@oldmud0 It's less about the architecture itself -- which by all accounts was at least okay -- and more about the lack of (recent) innovation and improvement to the CPU designs shipped using that architecture. Sun's latest SPARC stuff wasn't competitive with Intel, and it may not have been the architecture's fault; we don't know.
@qwertyuiop odd, considering he also said that he would file the motion with the EC as soon as he could...?
even the fucking Brexiters have no clue what to do with Cameron
@oldmud0 LLVM has an intermediary layer of architecture-independent code, IL, that "source language" (C, C++, etc.) code gets compiled into. From IL, then, regardless of which source language emitted the IL, the IL can get compiled to native code.
The question is, does the IL get compiled to native code "on the fly" by a compiler optimized for speed (because people aren't willing to wait many seconds for a JIT compiler to finish), or does the IL get compiled at development-time by a compiler whose goal is to optimize as much as possible, regardless if the compile takes 5 or 10 minutes?
It's technically possible to compile stuff to IL and use the IL "interpreter" for your platform (basically, JIT for the most part, but it may interpret some instructions one by one without generating native code for them) to "run" IL without compiling it to native code first, but nobody ever does that
people who use LLVM typically go: source language -> IL -> native code, all during development time, and then the resulting binary is very similar to what you get with e.g. GCC, but perhaps faster and better quality code
and the IL is written in such a way that it can fairly well support non-C-like languages too, such as Java, .NET, Ruby, ...
