chaz72

5 ms·

1.
by chaz72 6d ago
No worries, I take your word for the status of these in Rust and I don’t need those features in my own Zig comptime code which as I said in a different comment, has been very predictable over the last few years. Thanks for explaining though
2.
by chaz72 7d ago
> Ideally f(x) means the same thing whether evaluated by the compiler or by the generated program. Absolutely, that’s why I wanted to know what types of things aren’t covered yet, and that’s also why I don’t share your certainty that the
3.
by chaz72 7d ago
I hear you but I’m not sure it’s as dramatic as that, it’s also been quite predictable in my use over the last few years since I haven’t happened to use floating point or different endianness.
4.
by chaz72 7d ago
I get it now. Important things but not things that I use often - hopefully addressed by 1.0.
5.
by chaz72 7d ago
Now I see this response, I responded to the other comment.
6.
by chaz72 7d ago
Interesting, I hadn’t run across that but that’s probably just my problem domain. I did find this bug that looks like it was resolved a year ago https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/24184 and I have also rea
7.
by chaz72 7d ago
And they believe Zig comptime wouldn’t do that? For the same inputs? I’d love an example.
8.
by chaz72 7d ago
Are you saying that you think that Zig does not produce identical outcomes for comptime code regardless of when the code runs? What do you mean?
9.
by chaz72 2mo ago
Regardless of focusing on correctness or performance, it looks to me like the author didn’t understand arenas that well. Like the other commenter said, “You use an arena when you have computation that might consume a bunch of scratch memory
10.
by chaz72 2mo ago
My reasoning, which you may not agree with, is that I think that I have seen pron say unkind words before and I thought I had a better chance of persuading Steve to let it go. (Sorry pron, that’s how I was thinking of it. No, I have no sp
11.
by chaz72 2mo ago
I do see that you often have kind words for Zig and some attempt to more precisely define the differences. What I mean is a bit different though, it’s that these arguments you get drawn into end up drowning out any real discussion of Zig’s
12.
by chaz72 2mo ago
Yes! I think Fil is great so far but I think as he gets a bigger audience he should, well, consider that and focus on clarity a little more than humor. You can see Andrew’s growth in that respect. Rust folks, this whole thing is a thread
13.
by chaz72 2mo ago
If you choose to build static or dynamic libraries, I expect you’d still get to do that, and I expect as long as those don’t change and only the main binary needs patching it’d work the same. (Though I’m waiting for the next tagged release
14.
by chaz72 2mo ago
I know this is mostly a joke but I have seriously wondered if “no hidden behavior” made it easier to port from Zig. Like, regardless of how easy or successful the port was in general, I think Zig’s explicitness may have worked in its favo
15.
by chaz72 2mo ago
I don’t disagree. I responded to “clearly an anti-rust statement”, which is a bit of a stretch.
16.
by chaz72 2mo ago
“Focus on debugging your application rather than debugging your programming language knowledge” to me sounds like it is directed primarily at C and C++., it’s a much more direct translation.
17.
by chaz72 3mo ago
My specific reply was to laszlojamf saying “it seems like go, but with manual allocation”. To your point though, if Rust is getting it done, go for it. A lot of people still write those in C though.
18.
by chaz72 3mo ago
I think Zig would do better than Go at things like kernels, drivers, game engines, lower level sorts of things. Edited to add the obvious: SPIR-V, for instance. Of course there’s lots of programming that can afford to pay for GC side effe
19.
by chaz72 4mo ago
My interpretation of what they said is closer to “we already improved compilation speeds by 4x and we did it without compromising our plans to go much further - also this PR introduces specific timing bugs.”
20.
by chaz72 4mo ago
Apples and oranges, yeah. I should have spelled that out more, thanks.
21.
by chaz72 4mo ago
My guess is that one of these (Andrew) is measuring syscalls and the other is measuring vtable indirections.
22.
by chaz72 5y ago
Seriously, turn on the news once in a while.
23.
by chaz72 5y ago
That’s what I am betting on - but it isn’t 1.0 yet, and that matters too.
24.
by chaz72 5y ago
This is great! https://github.com/undergroundwires/privacy.sexy/tree/master... looks like the raw data (yaml) for all these commands, including commands for macOS. With that, it’s at least plausible to audit
25.
by chaz72 6y ago
Yes! I try to always phrase it as "the part I can see from here will take at least X time".
26.
by chaz72 6y ago
Okay, so your source is Giuliani. Well that is an answer, I guess. Sorry I was looking for a news source and not a political one. This is not nearly as credible - until evidence reaches a courtroom - as “somebody on the internet”.
27.
by chaz72 6y ago
Never heard of this source - I hope it’s okay in this time of misinformation to ask for a recognizable source? Edit: I mean I am okay with leaving it as “somebody on the internet says”, but wondered if the evidence was more clear than that.
28.
by chaz72 6y ago
Then you can definitely name one.
29.
by chaz72 6y ago
I am less certain that Fox didn't know who @whyspertech was.
30.
by chaz72 6y ago
It still might be a reasonable tradeoff for me, for some projects but regardless: thank you, that adds some nuance that I didn't get from your earlier comment.

More ›