3 ms·

Are you saying that the vector data structure is stupid?! And, moreover, that it's an opinion shared by the python and c++ communities? I'd love to see evidenc

by c-cube 4y ago

Are you saying that the vector data structure is stupid?! And, moreover, that it's an opinion shared by the python and c++ communities? I'd love to see evidence of that. I'd also love to read arguments about why Vec/vector is stupid, it's certainly the first time I read that.

mwcampbell 4y ago
No, he's saying that Haskell, C++, and Python proponents have each admitted that they were wrong about separate things.
- benreesman 4y ago
  No one in the C++ community is like, great, in order to keep shit working we’ve got to honor this ABI where we can’t do SSO. No one in the Haskell community is like great: linked lists as the fundamental data type is just awesome on modern x86. The people in the Python community are like great: we just broke everything and took a decade doing it, because we were emphatically wrong about ASCII being a given. The people in the Rust community say nothing like this: Rust isn’t wrong: you’re wrong. Which is going to get progressively weirder as we move back to ASICS more weird than GPUs. I’m enheartened to hear that someone (e.g. you parent) has some grasp on reality on this, but I’ve been in this game long enough to see a decade of progress dunked over CORBA and XML, which had nothing like the mindshare or organic buy-in this Rust stuff does. This is true fanaticism, and I don’t know about you, but I’m going to miss being retired for it’s consequences for the least fun decade of a career that included Visual Basic.
  - mwcampbell 4y ago
    > as we move back to ASICS more weird than GPUs. What percentage of new software will actually be affected by this? My guess is that it will still be most practical to write lots of software in an imperative style, and Rust will let us do that more safely and efficiently than other popular languages. For the problems that really need to be solved through custom ASICs, we have things like the Haskell-inspired Clash [1]. I doubt that the hype around Rust, and even the most misguided Rust boosters, will impede progress on that front. [1]: https://clash-lang.org/ https://clash-lang.org/
- c-cube 4y ago
  Ah, thank you for explaining, that makes sense. I think rust people (the ones I know anyway) don't think rust is perfect, or the end-it-all language. There already are a few warts (I'd say async really doesn't have the best ergonomics), but the language is a bit young for the community to find some really big issues? The fact that `?` is baked in for Option/Result is a pragmatic choice that allowed rust to ship in 2015, not 2035, when the research on mixing effect systems and borrow checker is done. There were already enough innovations tokens in rust 1.0, and moving the needle forward on memory safety and decent type systems is having a positive effect on all the other languages in that space (Zig, Carbon, now C++/C++2…).

by c-cube 4y ago

mwcampbell 4y ago

No, he's saying that Haskell, C++, and Python proponents have each admitted that they were wrong about separate things.

benreesman 4y ago
No one in the C++ community is like, great, in order to keep shit working we’ve got to honor this ABI where we can’t do SSO. No one in the Haskell community is like great: linked lists as the fundamental data type is just awesome on modern x86. The people in the Python community are like great: we just broke everything and took a decade doing it, because we were emphatically wrong about ASCII being a given. The people in the Rust community say nothing like this: Rust isn’t wrong: you’re wrong. Which is going to get progressively weirder as we move back to ASICS more weird than GPUs. I’m enheartened to hear that someone (e.g. you parent) has some grasp on reality on this, but I’ve been in this game long enough to see a decade of progress dunked over CORBA and XML, which had nothing like the mindshare or organic buy-in this Rust stuff does. This is true fanaticism, and I don’t know about you, but I’m going to miss being retired for it’s consequences for the least fun decade of a career that included Visual Basic.
- mwcampbell 4y ago
  > as we move back to ASICS more weird than GPUs. What percentage of new software will actually be affected by this? My guess is that it will still be most practical to write lots of software in an imperative style, and Rust will let us do that more safely and efficiently than other popular languages. For the problems that really need to be solved through custom ASICs, we have things like the Haskell-inspired Clash [1]. I doubt that the hype around Rust, and even the most misguided Rust boosters, will impede progress on that front. [1]: https://clash-lang.org/ https://clash-lang.org/
c-cube 4y ago
Ah, thank you for explaining, that makes sense. I think rust people (the ones I know anyway) don't think rust is perfect, or the end-it-all language. There already are a few warts (I'd say async really doesn't have the best ergonomics), but the language is a bit young for the community to find some really big issues? The fact that `?` is baked in for Option/Result is a pragmatic choice that allowed rust to ship in 2015, not 2035, when the research on mixing effect systems and borrow checker is done. There were already enough innovations tokens in rust 1.0, and moving the needle forward on memory safety and decent type systems is having a positive effect on all the other languages in that space (Zig, Carbon, now C++/C++2…).