estebank

39 ms·

361.
by estebank 2y ago
gccrs (and gcc-codegen which is a project with the same objective but only implementing the backend) is an independent project to Rust4Linux (but they talk to each other).
362.
by estebank 2y ago
I recall packages on Debian considered available for some obscure platforms that would segfault immediately when executed. Platform support goes beyond "does a compiler happen to produce a binary".
363.
by estebank 2y ago
And in the face of gaps of the test suite there's no assurance that consistent output will be preserved across releases of the same application . This is somewhat mitigated by the slow release schedule that these kind of projects usua
364.
by estebank 2y ago
I didn't follow up the stabilization process very closely, but I believe you're wrong. What you're describing is what used to be asm! and is now llvm_asm!. The current stable asm! syntax actually parses its own assembly inste
365.
by estebank 2y ago
Consider trying out Linux+KDE, if the reason to use 7 isn't specific software on older hardware. It feels like a continuation of Windows 7 as a desktop for the most part.
366.
by estebank 2y ago
The funny thing about XP is that it indirectly made running 2000 as a daily driver a better proposition, because all of a sudden consumer hardware and software was being made to work on an NT kernel. XP also had the benefit of riding Moore&
367.
by estebank 2y ago
> The last good OS MS released was Windows XP. I'm reminded of how much people hated it when it came out. Post Vista it was widely liked. A lot of people are also nostalgic of 7 now. I wonder if we'll have a batch of people nos
368.
by estebank 2y ago
It has the benefit of making the parsing of numeric comparisons unambiguous and trivial to parse. You'd use a different syntax for array indexing.
369.
by estebank 2y ago
I'm convinced that a COM-like solution with support for concepts that Rust/Swift have will be the sweet spot.
370.
by estebank 2y ago
Fun fact I didn't learn until adulthood: rust itself doesn't carry tetanus. What does is dirt. A rusty nail can pierce through clothing and skin because it is a nail, and can be assumed to have been in the dirt because it is r
371.
by estebank 2y ago
I suspect they are arguing that it is not because the default codegen backend produces LLVM IR, which C++ code turns into the final executable. The Cranelift backend which is pure Rust exists, but because it is not the default some people
372.
by estebank 2y ago
> I can tell you right now that, based on what you're saying, you'd almost definitely consider me to be a Nazi. You're reading an awful lot into what I wrote. > But I am 100% sure that given maybe 2 or 3 more messages,
373.
by estebank 2y ago
Yes, except for fixing soundness bugs (very rare in the past several years) and changes to the stdlib that might interact poorly with type inference and existing code (the time 0.3.5 issue, which is a change that breaks existing code, b
374.
by estebank 2y ago
That sounds like a useful patch. Why didn't you upstream it?
375.
by estebank 2y ago
It took me a while to understand the conflict until this dawned on me. It doesn't matter how many assurances the R4L team gives that they are on the hook for keeping up with breaking changes during the experiment, some maintainers were
376.
by estebank 2y ago
The thing about dogwhistles is that they are designed to communicate to like-minded people in a way that can be explained awatly while also making anyone that is attuned to them to sound crazy if they try to point them out. Remember the
377.
by estebank 2y ago
The same information that is useful for compilers (like rustc) and linters to reason about code, is also useful for humans to reason about code.
378.
by estebank 2y ago
I'm suggesting that the dichotomy is "earns wages from labor" vs "earns income from assets". The difference of someone on the 2nd decile vs someone on the 1st decile is that the former looks at the price on the supe
379.
by estebank 2y ago
Bucketing someone who makes $200k with someone who makes $200M instead of with someone who makes $20k sure is a choice.
380.
by estebank 2y ago
You are always free to use fully-qualified paths to protect yourself from any change in your dependencies (including std) that would break inference (by making more than one method resolve).
381.
by estebank 2y ago
You're reading an artifact of a point in time, before the it hit stable and the rest of the project found out about this. t-libs-api misunderstood the impact because in the past there had been situations that looked similar and were
382.
by estebank 2y ago
The fundamental issue here is that any kind of inference can have issues on the edges. If you write code using fully qualified paths all the time, then this semver footgun can never occur.
383.
by estebank 2y ago
It's not covering I up. The people that commented, including the one you quote are part of the project .
384.
by estebank 2y ago
> Nonetheless, if the rust dev team think this is a big deal, then clarify in release notes, write a blog post and make a commitment that regression at this level won't happen again. So far, there is little official response to this
385.
by estebank 2y ago
The failure mentioned above wasnt a case of the language changing behaviour, but rather the addition of a trait impl in the standard library conflicting with a trait impl in a third party crate, causing the build breakage.
386.
by estebank 2y ago
> Another important aspect is that Semver is a social contract, not a mechanical guarantee for. Although there are mechanical aids for it: https://crates.io/crates/cargo-semver-checks
387.
by estebank 2y ago
That was a mistake and a breakdown in processes that wasn't identified early enough to mitigate the problem. That situation does not represent the self imposed expectations on acceptable breakage, just that we failed to live up to it a
388.
by estebank 2y ago
In none of those did we know about the adverse effects. Those were observed afterwards, and it would have taken longer to know if they hadn't been adopted. But that doesn't invalidate the idea that we have followed "if someth
389.
by estebank 2y ago
I was replying to > when the has it ever been the case that you can just say "no" to the world developing a new technology?
390.
by estebank 2y ago
We no longer use asbestos as a flame flame retardant in houses. We no longer use chemicals harmful to the ozone layer on spray cans. We no longer use lead in gasoline. We figured those things were bad, and changed what we did. If evidence i

More ›