josephg

50 ms·

871.
by josephg 11mo ago
Ok, that might be true of Linus himself. But I'm not sure what point you're making by bringing that up. Give up then? Linux forever, lets never try and iterate and improve? Its weird talking to people in this thread. I get the imp
872.
by josephg 11mo ago
> There will never be a slow and careful rewrite in Rust. Nobody wants to do it Lots of people want to do it. Whether you want to run any of their code is an open question - but rewriting old things from scratch is a very popular passtim
873.
by josephg 11mo ago
Does Fil-C support dynamic linking to "yolo C" code or only modules that have also been compiled using fil-C? Would all the pam modules (eg pam_systemd.so, pam_selinux.so, etc) also need to be compiled with fil-c? I assume so, to
874.
by josephg 11mo ago
I mean, that's a real advantage. But personally I'm not so keen for all my system software to have the performance of garbage collected languages. I don't want my software to suddenly get 1.5x-4x slower and start using twice
875.
by josephg 11mo ago
> the reason why you'd pick Fil-C is that it's actually memory safe for real, unlike the alternatives, which just give you safety for newly written code but pull in a ton of unsafe depenendencies. Right; that makes a lot of sen
876.
by josephg 11mo ago
> I don't think these rewrites will ever be mainstream. Forever is a long time. And there's always a huge appetite amongst smart young developers to create their own ecosystem. After all, you don't become Linus Torvalds by
877.
by josephg 11mo ago
Out of curiosity, which tradeoffs were problematic for your design?
878.
by josephg 11mo ago
> In Fil-C: compile those dependencies with Fil-C, and then the whole process is safe. Great work on Fil-C by the way. Very technically impressive stuff! It seems like the competition for Fil-C is other garbage collected languages. Rust
879.
by josephg 11mo ago
> What is the actual catch with Fil-C? It sounds like Fil-C combines the ergonomics of C with the performance of Python. It might have a beautiful niche for safely sandboxing legacy code. But I don’t see any compelling reason to use it f
880.
by josephg 11mo ago
Sure they are. Eg, 911 call centers. Flight control. These systems aren’t on the open internet, but they’re absolutely networked. Do they apply regular security patches? If they do, they open themselves up to new bugs. If not, there are kno
881.
by josephg 11mo ago
I’m not really sure how checks like this can rival rust. Rust does an awful lot of checks at compile time - sometimes even to the point of forcing the developer to restructure their code or add special annotations just to help the compiler
882.
by josephg 11mo ago
Knuth once said there’s two kinds of programming languages in the world: Languages everyone complains about, and languages nobody uses. I feel like there’s some corollary here…
883.
by josephg 11mo ago
I’ve been enjoying the rust compio library lately which abstracts over io_uring on Linux. And IOCP and friends on windows. And it falls back to kqueue on macOS and presumably FreeBSD. It’s wonderful being able to write straightforward code
884.
by josephg 11mo ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt Zig was ever a paying customer of github.
885.
by josephg 11mo ago
> Microsoft can afford to make these tools better; they just dont care. They certainly have enough money, but can they actually improve it? Who could step in? How? Do you think more hiring would help? Or would it make it worse? Leadershi
886.
by josephg 11mo ago
Yeah. Its also weird that people online are fixating on unwrap - as if changing or fixing unwrap's semantics would have helped cloudflare here. The best way to think about unwrap is that its like an assert. If an assert trips, the answ
887.
by josephg 11mo ago
> Particulary, Rust is able to optimize out some bound checks. It doesn’t optimise out the bounds checks. I checked the assembly. Bounds checks in rust always look so ugly if you look at the assembly output because there’s all this panic
888.
by josephg 11mo ago
> I think my instinct is sympathy for the "Don't write aliases" approach. Yes, requiring that nothing alias it’s much more conceptually elegant. But as I said, in practice it makes programming extremely treacherous. There
889.
by josephg 11mo ago
> it's an ongoing thorn of mine that the Rust community seems to decide that anything which cannot be programmed in rust is obsolete legacy. Nobody is arguing that you can't program a binary tree or b-tree in rust. I think its
890.
by josephg 11mo ago
> Both Option and Result can be unwrapped and - to some extent not coincidentally - both can also be subject to the Try operator (?) which is arguably more correct here than unwrap because this can fail and perhaps the caller will have s
891.
by josephg 11mo ago
No. Should I? It looks like a markdown renderer with a huge pile of custom extensions. It looks like they've added support for some of the things I need (eg references). But not other stuff. It has hardcoded block support for Note and
892.
by josephg 11mo ago
I hear you, but to be clear - you're not using markdown any more. A quick look at the docusaurus website suggests it uses MDX, which explicitly does not support commonmark. MDX documents cannot be rendered with other markdown renderers
893.
by josephg 11mo ago
> Do note that binary trees are mostly an obsolete legacy today — they are way too cache-unfriendly. I mean you could have written similar code in C++ using std::vector or std::dequeue and get the bounds checking too. As a sibling commen
894.
by josephg 11mo ago
> The main body of the article is not hate — it's plain facts. Everybody working on a significant Rust codebase agrees ... Lol. Its not facts. Its a description of frustrating things you've experienced working with rust, dresse
895.
by josephg 11mo ago
Can you give some examples? C/C++ devs seem to be very upset about rust content. Where all these annoying articles claiming we should rewrite everything in rust? They must be all over the place given how much C/C++ devs are upset.
896.
by josephg 11mo ago
> The cloudflare bug was not caused by rust Yeah. Rust’s Option::None as like null in C++. Unwrapping an option is like checking if something is null and crashing. This "crash from an unwrap" is just a null pointer exception &#
897.
by josephg 11mo ago
A couple years ago I implemented a btree (technically order statistic tree) in a couple thousand lines of unsafe rust for a project. I wrote it more or less how I'd do it in C. Each internal node and leaf node was a separate heap alloc
898.
by josephg 11mo ago
What else? I want figures. I want linked references. I want custom styling for images, and for blocks of text (eg warnings, notes, etc). I want a TOC and numbered chapters and sections. Sometimes I want a bibliography. Or a table generated
899.
by josephg 1y ago
> we do know for sure that there's no macOS in the sdk because they weren't forced to by regulation. Unless you have insider knowledge, we don't know anything for sure here. Apple isn't a person. Apple doesn't ha
900.
by josephg 1y ago
Look, you might be right. But you might be wrong. We don't know for sure. One of my first jobs was in infosec, and there was a sign above one of the senior consultant's door quoting Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to ma

More ›