3 ms·

Wether or not these quotes should stay in the rust runtime should be a decision based on the concerns of the languages main stakeholder, and that's the language

by tinco 12y ago

Wether or not these quotes should stay in the rust runtime should be a decision based on the concerns of the languages main stakeholder, and that's the language core developers. If the developers would lose even the littlest amount of joy or dedication to the project because their project culture is corrupted by concerns over lawyers and perceptions of irrational programmers, then that would be a significant detriment to the project. I'm not saying the developers work on Rust because there's Lovecraft quotes in there, but the Lovecraft quotes are in there because the developers are in control of the project. One of the main things that keeps you happy in a job is being in control, and there's very little things you are in control over in such a project to begin with. So what's the upside of this? It makes the developers and some users happy. You shouldn't be asking what's the upside, because it's obvious. What's the downside? 2kb of memory for people with GBs of it to spare. Embedded developers? They're not including the runtime anyway. From my perspective, the naysayers are just irrational. (As developers often are when judging their tools) edit: anyway, however fun it is to discuss this, it's not really up to us, and the majority of the core developers already reached a concensus in the first 4 comments that the quotes should go, so everyone pitching in after that is pretty much making an elephant out of a fly (including me). summary of discussion: "There's 2kb of bloat", "That's only 0.56%", "Yes, but it looks unprofessional", "Ok let's remove it", "Ok, but I loved it :("

dlisboa 12y ago
Show me all those projects with sad developers who abandoned contributing because they didn't include quotes in their binaries.
- tinco 12y ago
  Sad developers who abandoned contributing: Joey Hess[0] Developer that is sad because a committee is irrationally ganging up on his loved inclusion of quotes: Steve Klabnik[1] 0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html 1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13871#issuecomment-41917976 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13871#issuecomment-...
  - falcolas 12y ago
    (Joey Hess) ∉ (Rust Developers) Plus, neglecting to include a few Lovecraft quotes does not seem on the same level as "It's clear to me now that [the Debian constitution is] a toxic document, that has slowly but surely led Debian in very unhealthy directions."
  - steveklabnik 12y ago
    To make my position on this issue clear, it won't be the end of the world if we lose the Lovecraft, and indeed, we are. I find the space issue more compelling than some sort of 'professionalism' claim though. Being a professional does not mean being boring.
userbinator 12y ago
based on the concerns of the languages main stakeholder, and that's the language core developers Shouldn't that be its users? One of the main things that keeps you happy in a job is being in control, and there's very little things you are in control over in such a project to begin with. It makes the developers and some users happy. In other words, it's there mostly because the developers are more concerned with having fun among themselves, rather than the needs of their users? "some users" is vague, but I doubt it's the majority. What's the downside? 2kb of memory for people with GBs of it to spare I wish this "it's only X amount" type of thinking would stop, because this is really 2K multiplied by all the times it gets used. Fun and games has its time and place, but the runtime library of a new language that's trying to increase its popularity is not it. For example, I enjoy watching 1/2/4K demos, but wouldn't be amused at all if one was embedded in Rust.
- tinco 12y ago
  > Shouldn't that be its users? No, an open source project with a minor foothold is wholly dependant on its developers/contributors. The users at this point have very little investment. > because this is really 2K multiplied by all the times it gets used No matter how many times it gets used, it's still 0.56%. > Fun and games has its time and place, but the runtime library of a new language that's trying to increase its popularity is not it. Despite your baseless proposition, Rust has done very well in gaining popularity as a C++ competitor. It has done this by discerning in features that actually matter like safety, structure and consistency.
- dbaupp 12y ago
  > Shouldn't that be its users? In general, the developers of a project get to decide if they "care" about users; maybe they're working on the project purely for fun, or for research purposes, and so desires of other people trying to use it are essentially irrelevant. (This isn't the case for Rust; but the enjoyment of the contributors and core team is still important, most of the contributors and some of the core team are volunteers.)
jnbiche 12y ago
You're making it out to be devs vs users, but let's not overlook the fact that the project lead, along with several major contributors, have independently brought this up and expressed concerns.

by tinco 12y ago

dlisboa 12y ago

Show me all those projects with sad developers who abandoned contributing because they didn't include quotes in their binaries.

tinco 12y ago
Sad developers who abandoned contributing: Joey Hess[0] Developer that is sad because a committee is irrationally ganging up on his loved inclusion of quotes: Steve Klabnik[1] 0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html 1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13871#issuecomment-41917976 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13871#issuecomment-...
- falcolas 12y ago
  (Joey Hess) ∉ (Rust Developers) Plus, neglecting to include a few Lovecraft quotes does not seem on the same level as "It's clear to me now that [the Debian constitution is] a toxic document, that has slowly but surely led Debian in very unhealthy directions."
- steveklabnik 12y ago
  To make my position on this issue clear, it won't be the end of the world if we lose the Lovecraft, and indeed, we are. I find the space issue more compelling than some sort of 'professionalism' claim though. Being a professional does not mean being boring.

userbinator 12y ago

based on the concerns of the languages main stakeholder, and that's the language core developers Shouldn't that be its users? One of the main things that keeps you happy in a job is being in control, and there's very little things you are in control over in such a project to begin with. It makes the developers and some users happy. In other words, it's there mostly because the developers are more concerned with having fun among themselves, rather than the needs of their users? "some users" is vague, but I doubt it's the majority. What's the downside? 2kb of memory for people with GBs of it to spare I wish this "it's only X amount" type of thinking would stop, because this is really 2K multiplied by all the times it gets used. Fun and games has its time and place, but the runtime library of a new language that's trying to increase its popularity is not it. For example, I enjoy watching 1/2/4K demos, but wouldn't be amused at all if one was embedded in Rust.

tinco 12y ago
> Shouldn't that be its users? No, an open source project with a minor foothold is wholly dependant on its developers/contributors. The users at this point have very little investment. > because this is really 2K multiplied by all the times it gets used No matter how many times it gets used, it's still 0.56%. > Fun and games has its time and place, but the runtime library of a new language that's trying to increase its popularity is not it. Despite your baseless proposition, Rust has done very well in gaining popularity as a C++ competitor. It has done this by discerning in features that actually matter like safety, structure and consistency.
dbaupp 12y ago
> Shouldn't that be its users? In general, the developers of a project get to decide if they "care" about users; maybe they're working on the project purely for fun, or for research purposes, and so desires of other people trying to use it are essentially irrelevant. (This isn't the case for Rust; but the enjoyment of the contributors and core team is still important, most of the contributors and some of the core team are volunteers.)

jnbiche 12y ago

You're making it out to be devs vs users, but let's not overlook the fact that the project lead, along with several major contributors, have independently brought this up and expressed concerns.