4 ms·
Please, calm down. I do appreciate your work on Rust, but people do make mistakes and I strongly belive that in the long term the async stabilization was one of
by newpavlov 6y ago
Please, calm down. I do appreciate your work on Rust, but people do make mistakes and I strongly belive that in the long term the async stabilization was one of them. It's debatable whether async was essential or not for Rust, I agree it gave Rust a noticeable boost in popularity, but personally I don't think it was worth the long term cost. I do not intend to change your opinion, but I will keep mine and reserve the right to speak about this opinion publicly.
In this thread [1] we have a more technicall discussion about those models, I suggest to continue that thread.
>I assure you, the problems it present are not related to Rust's polling model AT ALL.
I do not agree about all problems, but my OP was indeed worded somewhat poorly, as I've admitted here [2].
>Pin is not a hack any more than Box is. It is the only way to fit the desired ownership expression into the language that already exists
I can agree that it was the easiest solution, but I strongly disagree about the only one. And frankly it's quite disheartening to hear from a tech leader such absolutistic statements.
>It is simply FUD - frankly, a lie - to say that it will block "noalias,
Where did I say "will"? I think you will agree that it at the very least will it will cause a delay. Also the issue shows that Pin was not proprely thought out, especially in the light of other safety issues it has caused. And as uou can see by other comments, I am not the only one who thinks so.
>the content your consuming is usually from one of these kinds of people:
Please, satisfy my curiosity. To which category do I belong in your opinion?
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26410359 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26410359
[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26407565 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26407565
- stjohnswarts 6y agoSo why did you not present your own solutions to the issues that you criticized or better yet fix it with an RFC rather than declaring a working system as basically a failure (per your title). I think you wouldn't have 10% of the saltiness if you didn't have such an aggressive title to your article.
- Supermancho 6y agoYou know the F-35 is a disaster of a government project from looking at it, why not submit a better design? That isn't helpful. You might be interested in the discussion from here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26407770 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26407770
- newpavlov 6y agoI have tried to raise those issues in the stabilization issue (I know, quite late in the game), but it simply got shut down by the linked comment with a clear message that further discussion be it in an issue on in a new RFC will be pointless. Also please note that the article is not mine.
- HoolaBoola 6y ago> Please, calm down. By the way, that will almost certainly be taken in a bad way. It's never a good idea to start a comment with something like "chill" or "calm down", as it feels incredibly dismissive. > I do appreciate your work on Rust, but There's a saying that anything before a "but" is meaningless. This is not meant to critique the rest of the comment, just point out a couple parts that don't help in defusing the tense situation.
- newpavlov 6y agoThank you for the advice. Yes, I should've been more careful in my previous comment. I have noticed this comment only after engaging with him in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26410565 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26410565 in which he wrote about me: > You do not know what you are talking about. > You are confused. So my reaction was a bit too harsh partially due to that.