Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
Ygg2
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
14 ms
·
271.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
There have been negative consequences for individuals before it didn't really change anything big.
272.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
On the flip side, even if you punish the villain, garbage papers still get printed. Almost like there is a root cause. Both views are maximalistic.
273.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> • why do directors and producers sign off effects that are just eye-bleeding bad? It's a bit cheaper. > • using a realtime engine to develop the effects, doesn't preclude using some real render-pass at the end to get a nic
274.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
Damn, then Rust is safe from AI :D No one understands it either.
275.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
Sure it isn't. It is still a financial liability. You need to sacrifice time clearing it to get to work that actually pays the bills.
276.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> No. Most memory management in Rust is not through it's GC, even though most Rust programs do use the GC to some extent. Most? You still haven't proved that. So most Rust programs mostly use GC, yet it's not a GC language
277.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> That's a strange expression given that the percentage of programs written in languages that rely primarily on a GC for memory management has been rising steadily for about 30 years I wish I knew what you mean by programs relying p
278.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
Sure, but all code is a potential future debt. You wrote a music player that only allows one artist from list of all artists? Tech debt. You wrote optimized assembly for x86_64? It's the year 2060, and we only support NGPU_ARM_N_LEG. T
279.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
Liability is also an economic term. As in, "The bank's assets (debt) are my liability, and my assets (house) are the bank's liability." I don't think it's a wrong quote. Code's behavior is the asset, and c
280.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> Come on. The majority of Rust programs use the GC. This part is false. You make a ridiculous statement and expect everyone to just nod along. I could see this being true iff you say all Rust UI programs use "RC". > This is
281.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
I'm reading it as charitably as possible as in "Maybe some lifetime in some arcane combination is unsound." I did heard that 'static lifetime shouldn't be permitted in some cases. The premise is too ridiculous to e
282.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> Borrow checking in Rust isn't sound AFAIK, even after all these years Huh? If borrow checking in Rust is unsound, that's akin to saying Rust is utterly broken. Sounds like you've been fed FUD. If Rust was that unsound, R
283.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> Except I never called it "a GC language" (whatever that means). I said, and I quote, "Rust does have a GC". Ok, semantics aside, my point still stands. C also has a GC. See Boehm GC. And before you complain RC is pa
284.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> Except reference counting is one of the two classical GC algorithms (alongside tracing), so I think it's strange to treat it as "not a GC". But it is true that GC/no-GC distinction is not very meaningful given how d
285.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> I don't know if the "reasonable definition" of GC matters at all If you define all non-red colors to be green, it is impossible to talk about color theory. > And Rust wins the Razzie Award for most painful development
286.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> Rust does have a GC It doesn't. Not by any reasonable definition of having a GC. And "opt-in non-tracing GC that isn't used largely throughout the standard library" is not a reasonable definition. > Nobody knows
287.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> I love rust, but C does make it a lot easier to make certain kinds of container types. Ok. But making it easier or harder isn't the same as making it impossible. To quote GP: > 2) I believe the problem was related to the fact t
288.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
So it re-adds manual lifetime checking. Got it.
289.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> 1. more compile-time safety is always better, even if it complicates the language (or everyone who uses Rust should use ATS), and 2. any cost is worth paying for safety (or Rust wouldn't exist in the first place). You keep repeati
290.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> This is a fundamental limitation Not really. Yeah you need to reach into unsafe to make a doubly linked list that passes borrow checker. Guess what. You need unsafe implementation to print to console. Doesn't mean printing out is
291.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
No, you become enemy if someone unlawfully, and uni-laterally annexes a part of your territory. For example see Ukraine.
292.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> These do not seem entirely consistent? > But the plans were on display…” “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.” “That’s the display department.” “With a flashlight.” “Ah, well, the lights had probably
293.
▲
by
Ygg2
9mo ago
> Remind me, which Ferengi Rule of Acquisition is this? Never spend more for an acquisition than you have to. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Rules_of_Acquisition
294.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
He's mentioning Desktop environment, I assume he means all the parts, not just UI.
295.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
Damn, they didn't miss a spot to add a Loss comic reference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_(Ctrl%2BAlt%2BDel)
296.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
It's functional - yes, intuitive - maybe, but optimized is highly debatable. The answer to maintaining a highly functional and stable OS is piles and piles of backwards compatibility misery on the devs. You want Windows 9? Sorry, some
297.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
As a broke ass teenager, yeah I didn't pay for them. Now as big money adult I bought them almost 1.5 times over. Once on GoG and sometimes on Steam.
298.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
Yeah, because rather than pirating from cracxxxed.warez I can buy the game on Steam/GoG sale for $1.4.
299.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
I think Blow and Muratori are pure engineers (as defined here: https://www.seangoedecke.com/pure-and-impure-engineering/ ). Pure engineers deliver perfect and fast software somewhere along the Black Hole Era. Not quite
300.
▲
by
Ygg2
10mo ago
(Good) Abstraction is there to hide complexity. I don't think it's controversial to say that software has become extremely complex. You need to support more spoken languages, more backends, more complex devices, etc.
More ›