jolux

37 ms·

451.
by jolux 5y ago
Yeah I mean if you assume all countries are maximally aggressive it makes a lot of sense, but there’s a fundamental problem in that the empirical evidence does not sustain this suggestion.
452.
by jolux 5y ago
We’re not threatening war against Russia, we’re threatening sanctions. They’re the ones that annexed Crimea. They’re the ones surrounding a sovereign nation with military forces. [edit] I mean look, call it what you will. The United States
453.
by jolux 5y ago
We’re receiving the punishment now, in that nobody has any good reason to trust us anymore. Still doesn’t justify aggression.
454.
by jolux 5y ago
Under what theory of international relations is it legitimate for one country to invade another because they’re upset that other countries bordering it made treaty agreements with another power?
455.
by jolux 5y ago
Maybe? The problems definitely change. So much of software engineering is about managing complexity well. I haven't worked on sufficiently large projects or in sufficiently large organizations to tell you how exactly how it changes, I
456.
by jolux 5y ago
> Well, if we software peeps fully understood our deliverables, we wouldn't have bugs, or at least, we'd always know what bugs are there. I don't think this is really incompatible with some of what Hillel gets at in his po
457.
by jolux 5y ago
Parsing untrusted input in C never hurt anyone, did it?
458.
by jolux 5y ago
Process-per-request is just infeasible with any significant amount of load.
459.
by jolux 5y ago
> All 100% memory safety, and yet security is still a thing. And nobody has ever claimed that memory safety is the only thing that matters with security, but it’s definitely high on the list. Can you imagine how much more of a nightmare
460.
by jolux 5y ago
I read the thread about the keyboard at the time. The author literally said it was a hobby project and they weren't concerned about safety, which is why they weren't interested in all of the solutions people offered for their prob
461.
by jolux 5y ago
Yes it does start fairly quick, nothing like the JVM. It's not nearly as fast while it's running, though. It only recently got a JIT, and currently doesn't do any optimization of the generated code.
462.
by jolux 5y ago
But this is not a fundamental limitation, there's nothing about the language that requires you to use heap allocation. That it contains affordances for safe heap allocation is a good thing, but you're not required to use them. The
463.
by jolux 5y ago
> not depriving users of control when they know better than the type checker/lifetime analysis. You're never deprived of control though, that's what unsafe is for, and it provides roughly the same level of safety as C or Z
464.
by jolux 5y ago
> memory-safety can be achieved in other ways I mean, as far as achieving it at compile time, I would say it remains to be seen whether Zig's approach is one of these ways. There are certainly other known approaches, like the way AT
465.
by jolux 5y ago
To me the biggest difference between Rust and Zig in practical terms is that Zig does not offer statically safe resource management like Rust does, and as far as I know they have no intentions of doing so in the future because they think it
466.
by jolux 5y ago
OCaml and Rust both offer these, OCaml does overloading mostly with module functors and Rust with traits. Of course they’re both multi-paradigm, OCaml is also really good for functional programming.
467.
by jolux 5y ago
Alcohol itself is a depressant and can lead to depression or make depression worse. It’s best to avoid it entirely if you have a history of depression, or at least take extreme care to watch your consumption of it and its relation to your s
468.
by jolux 5y ago
Yes but there’s no reason it has to be a dealership doing that. The manufacturer could do that before they deliver the car. The manufacturer could run the dealership themselves. There’s not a ton of great reasons to preserve this institutio
469.
by jolux 5y ago
Nah this was all over the news. I heard about it. Everyone I know heard about it, especially if they're into cars. See also Toyota's infamous sticky accelerator recall, or the Takata airbag recall. The difference is that Tesla did
470.
by jolux 5y ago
It's not about the dealership model, it's about taking quality seriously and not just slapping things together and pushing them out the door with minimal QC like a software startup in a tight market. It's clear by now that El
471.
by jolux 5y ago
Oh, I see what you mean. Yes, the flow is probably going to require user consent via a browser. But that doesn’t mean the whole app has to be JavaScript, and I believe there are flows that are more suitable for clients that aren’t. And I’m
472.
by jolux 5y ago
That's…not the same question. But yes, I am. We have systems at work built on AWS Cognito and OpenID Connect, which is based on OAuth2. No browser is required, except to interface with the user. It's all HTTP and JSON underneath.
473.
by jolux 5y ago
Who's to say it's "incorrect English?" You clearly understood what was said. This person's identity seems like the least interesting and most irrelevant part of this discussion.
474.
by jolux 5y ago
What part of OAuth2 requires browsers? You need to be able to handle JSON, but I'm pretty sure you don't need to be able to render anything.
475.
by jolux 5y ago
My point is that Actix Web was still safer than it would have been if it were written in C++ (which is Rust’s whole goal as far as safety), and moreover the norms of the Rust community are so strong that most of the unsafe usage has since b
476.
by jolux 5y ago
Do you think Actix Web would be safer if it were written in C++?
477.
by jolux 5y ago
It runs in a web browser. It's a web app.
478.
by jolux 5y ago
I think the biggest difference is just that the layout algorithm for the DOM is a lot more complex than those for native apps. Changing one element might reflow the whole page. Native frameworks aren't like that, and the solution they&
479.
by jolux 5y ago
> It's possible to make buggy, slow, crappy software in any language. True. > Rust is no exception. Also true. > Nobody should derive any confidence from the language a product is written in. This, on the other hand, is a non-
480.
by jolux 5y ago
I'm not a particular fan of Microsoft products, like I said I'm all-in with Apple stuff. But they have always understood developers better than Apple has, and I think their recent strategic efforts with .NET and Android demonstrat

More ›