4 ms·

Here is the commit responsible for that: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/51abdee5f1ad932671350fdd8a7911fe144d08b8 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/co

by RailsUser2014 12y ago

Here is the commit responsible for that: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/51abdee5f1ad932671350fdd8a7911fe144d08b8 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/51abdee5f1ad9326713... What's the point of adding this very long text?

Someone1234 12y ago
Fun? Is that not allowed anymore?
- jwatte 12y ago
  If Rust is widely adopted, and if this commit adds a kilobyte to every language and every library downloaded by everyone, would the fun for the author be worth it?
  - 4ad 12y ago
    Wow, a whole kilobyte! OMG. There are many valid reasons why this should be removed, but binary size is not one of them.
    - recursive 12y ago
      Why not?
    - jwatte 12y ago
      Can you do the math for me of every user on the internet times every program downloaded?
    - f4444 12y ago
      Size is certainly an important factor in embedded systems, one of the areas there is a lot of interest in Rust.
  - ploxiln 12y ago
    If Rust is widely adopted, it'll save megabytes per executable compared to go or a nodejs tool with all its copies of all its modules. Really, the scale of efficiency delta between various things used on computers today is vast, and it's hard to say whether something like this "easter egg" is really significant. A few years ago I knew of a linux distro called "slitaz" that was a 30mb ISO, and it had x windows and a minimal window manager and a barebones browser and such.
    - mkishi 12y ago
      Genuine question: Megabytes compared to Go? Why?
      - untothebreach 12y ago
        Because the Go runtime is statically linked into every binary built by Go. This is nice for deployment, since you can just plop the binary onto any ol' server, but makes for large binaries.
  - lclarkmichalek 12y ago
    yes
  - ephemeralgomi 12y ago
    If Rust is widely adopted, and this actually becomes a problem for anyone, someone will submit a pull request to remove it, it will be debated, and probably pass. On the other hand, its presence in the current codebase will tend to attract playful tinkerers, which is arguably what it needs in its current stage of development.
- RailsUser2014 12y ago
  @Someone1234 You're kidding? Try adding a new pull request in C and tell them that you want to add a text inside every compiled c program because "it's funny". I'm not sure they'll agree with you.
  - fixermark 12y ago
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg00049.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg00049.html Search for "Here's a nickel" [edit: clearer source than the text around the patch: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libgcc/soft-fp/single.h https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libgcc/soft-fp...]
    - duskwuff 12y ago
      That's a compile-time error message, though. It doesn't appear in compiled code, only in the source.
- ad_hominem 12y ago
  I'm sure it's deeply moving to read poetry when your program crashes in development. But when I'm trying to resolve a production issue and I have to waste brain cycles ignoring garbage text to solve a problem, I will hunt you down.
  - Jetrel 12y ago
    "Come at me bro." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS1esgRV4Rc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS1esgRV4Rc I'm not by any means the guy who wrote that easter egg, but I'm in absolute solidarity with his sentiment. I don't want to be a Randian Ubermensh like Howard Roark, in a soviet world stripped of all artifice and caprice. The world needs to stay playful - and my world is software. Fun isn't optional; it's absolutely necessary for the human psyche - any description of a world without it is isomorphic to a prison or a hell. The price of fun is frivolity - one man's fun is another man's "stupid waste of time". There's no way around this; it's just the table ante we have to pay for having a non-spartan culture. Yes, the overhead cost sucks ... but the alternative has been proven to be much much worse.

Someone1234 12y ago

Fun? Is that not allowed anymore?

jwatte 12y ago
If Rust is widely adopted, and if this commit adds a kilobyte to every language and every library downloaded by everyone, would the fun for the author be worth it?
- 4ad 12y ago
  Wow, a whole kilobyte! OMG. There are many valid reasons why this should be removed, but binary size is not one of them.
  - recursive 12y ago
    Why not?
  - jwatte 12y ago
    Can you do the math for me of every user on the internet times every program downloaded?
  - f4444 12y ago
    Size is certainly an important factor in embedded systems, one of the areas there is a lot of interest in Rust.
- ploxiln 12y ago
  If Rust is widely adopted, it'll save megabytes per executable compared to go or a nodejs tool with all its copies of all its modules. Really, the scale of efficiency delta between various things used on computers today is vast, and it's hard to say whether something like this "easter egg" is really significant. A few years ago I knew of a linux distro called "slitaz" that was a 30mb ISO, and it had x windows and a minimal window manager and a barebones browser and such.
  - mkishi 12y ago
    Genuine question: Megabytes compared to Go? Why?
    - untothebreach 12y ago
      Because the Go runtime is statically linked into every binary built by Go. This is nice for deployment, since you can just plop the binary onto any ol' server, but makes for large binaries.
- lclarkmichalek 12y ago
  yes
- ephemeralgomi 12y ago
  If Rust is widely adopted, and this actually becomes a problem for anyone, someone will submit a pull request to remove it, it will be debated, and probably pass. On the other hand, its presence in the current codebase will tend to attract playful tinkerers, which is arguably what it needs in its current stage of development.
RailsUser2014 12y ago
@Someone1234 You're kidding? Try adding a new pull request in C and tell them that you want to add a text inside every compiled c program because "it's funny". I'm not sure they'll agree with you.
- fixermark 12y ago
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg00049.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg00049.html Search for "Here's a nickel" [edit: clearer source than the text around the patch: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libgcc/soft-fp/single.h https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libgcc/soft-fp...]
  - duskwuff 12y ago
    That's a compile-time error message, though. It doesn't appear in compiled code, only in the source.
ad_hominem 12y ago
I'm sure it's deeply moving to read poetry when your program crashes in development. But when I'm trying to resolve a production issue and I have to waste brain cycles ignoring garbage text to solve a problem, I will hunt you down.
- Jetrel 12y ago
  "Come at me bro." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS1esgRV4Rc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS1esgRV4Rc I'm not by any means the guy who wrote that easter egg, but I'm in absolute solidarity with his sentiment. I don't want to be a Randian Ubermensh like Howard Roark, in a soviet world stripped of all artifice and caprice. The world needs to stay playful - and my world is software. Fun isn't optional; it's absolutely necessary for the human psyche - any description of a world without it is isomorphic to a prison or a hell. The price of fun is frivolity - one man's fun is another man's "stupid waste of time". There's no way around this; it's just the table ante we have to pay for having a non-spartan culture. Yes, the overhead cost sucks ... but the alternative has been proven to be much much worse.