59nadir

35 ms·

481.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> I loved Nim and considered it to be my second choice. But something pulled me off. Maybe the GC. I was under the impression that the Nim GC was basically entirely optional. Is that not the case? They also added a bunch of other ways to
482.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Is it really boring that you have to learn 20 different features to do 20 different things? There is a certain economy at play with feature sets that the author brings up that has nothing to do with "boring" or not; having to lear
483.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Thought you should know, "yinz" is extremely regional and not nearly as recognizable as other dialectal/regional words meaning the same thing. You probably have a very low hit-rate comprehension-wise using it, considering it
484.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> That being said, rest assured that your experience says absolutely nothing about the wider Rust community. It's one of the most helpful ones I've engaged with. It's very common to see people with toxic attitudes in and a
485.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Donna is presented as quite gifted and competent pretty much all the time, yes, but to say that Gordon isn't is a bit of an oversimplification. Donna's genius is tempered and tamed; she spends most of season 1 being "The Adul
486.
by 59nadir 6y ago
It's almost always a mistake to take the convenience of not having to pass an allocator over the flexibility of passing one. Testing, optimization via different allocators, etc. all become much easier to work with if you just make it a
487.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> Yes a lot of it is wobbly, but we're also comfortably a year ahead of the established players. It's likely that you would be ahead of established players with old, not shiny technology as well. Established players have an inh
488.
by 59nadir 6y ago
That seems to be the explicit intent of the creator; a way to output C/C++ and hit the same use case targets but with much more powerful code generation facilities and a syntax that is much more amenable to that.
489.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Fossil has always seemed like a step up from `git` to me. Better defaults, a holistic solution, much more human-friendly interface and the format is better for working with code-wise as well, for querying and all that. That being said it&#x
490.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> It's funny you mention Stockolm syndrome, then continuing on with an anecdote how Windows always works for you. I didn't say "Windows always works for me", but rather that these imagined conversations about issues l
491.
by 59nadir 6y ago
They really, really don't. This is one area where Stockholm syndrome usually kicks in hard for people who desperately want it to be true that Linux is polished and ready for the masses. Truthfully, I think I have the same issues on Lin
492.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Let's be fair: They're moving away from OCaml because there's a ton of stuff that's impractical about using OCaml, mostly related to the very bare ecosystem tooling that's seen maybe a few years of good light and &q
493.
by 59nadir 6y ago
While I wouldn't want to fire someone for using bad/incomplete/incapable tooling, the Nth time someone doesn't follow the style guide (which is automated for everyone else, but not for this guy because his 1337 editor do
494.
by 59nadir 6y ago
While I'm not usually 100% happy with the Discord server (it currently has very little moderation and has had one user behave like a piece of shit for a long time) I've had a hard time finding the flame war you mention. I found th
495.
by 59nadir 6y ago
But a strict improvement on the preprocessor madness that you have to get into with C. Having `static if`-like behavior is much preferable to `#ifdef` and the like and other things falling out of that system is just a bonus. It's tempt
496.
by 59nadir 6y ago
One of the main gripes I have with C++ is exactly what you said, that the defaults usually are the wrong for the usual cases and for general sanity. With that said, C programmers also seem to love their implicit behavior so it's pretty
497.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> And how do other languages get away with it? General purpose allocators are (basically) never the best for speed, fragmentation, and so on. They can at most be good enough. Basic knowledge about how your memory is going to be used that
498.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> For sure, writing your own allocator is the last thing you reach for after all else fails. Writing your own general purpose allocator might be the last thing, but custom allocators for well-understood limited/localized behavior is
499.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Bjarne Stroustrup learned most of what he knows about OO from Kristen Nygaard personally, as he was at Aarhus University at the same time as Nygaard was there. He'd sit and talk to Nygaard for hours, but noted in an interview with Lex
500.
by 59nadir 6y ago
What everyone is talking about isn't "not having to write `and_then` over and over" but rather that there is a common interface to "things that are monads", i.e. `>>=`, `map` and `apply`. `do`-notation is nice
501.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Footnote: With Ada/SPARK being much more battle-tested and ATS being a much more flexible & complete solution. Though I wouldn't exactly recommend ATS in terms of learning curve.
502.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> I often think to myself, "ok, you've just taken half an hour to do what I could have done in less than a minute." As a power user myself, this feels like a major exaggeration and mostly like a brag. A good IDE is way mor
503.
by 59nadir 6y ago
The irony of this statement when the author was hounded tirelessly by the Memory Safety Mafia until he plain didn't want to work on it anymore...
504.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Rust isn't nearly popular enough to be referred to as "the new normal" in any field or context. One would have to be in a very closed off bubble to think it is. If they haven't made some big strides with having it certif
505.
by 59nadir 6y ago
This isn't even remotely what the post is about. It's about how the C standard is resistant even to things like warnings for provably bad code in the name of backwards compatibility ("more warnings for (maybe) working code =
506.
by 59nadir 6y ago
You've misunderstood what "weakly typed" means. If a language implicitly converts values (like your C example) or otherwise lets execution move forward in the presence of what are or should be type errors, it's weakly ty
507.
by 59nadir 6y ago
Except these apps aren't really using the marketplace. Pretty much the entire service is being delivered outside of the marketplace and they purposefully don't charge for the app download so as to not use the payment processing o
508.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> The overlooked thing is rustc produces poor quality LLVM IR which is also mentioned in FAQ. LLVM is also slow in general. If you use it, it's likely the thing that's bottlenecking your language's compile-time unless you&
509.
by 59nadir 6y ago
C is already the undisputed king of running everything and on everything, no one who writes C needs to seek validation like this.
510.
by 59nadir 6y ago
> Erm, you can setup dialyzer to be as strict as possible. No. This is just plain false. Having used dialyzer since 2016 I can tell you it's not useful as a substitute for statically checked types via a compiler, with real strictnes

More ›