pdimitar

49 ms·

751.
by pdimitar 2y ago
No, it's LISP for people who understand multicore CPUs exist for a long time now. Modern LISP dialect authors still believe threads are a super clever idea which is just... /facepalm.
752.
by pdimitar 2y ago
They have but it's mostly a labor of love and it's very difficult to fit a static type system into a dynamically typed language. We already have some false positives. Happily the team is very motivated and is grinding away at them
753.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Ability to manage tens of thousands of stateful connections without the 95th percentile requests jumping to 5 seconds. Just to start with.
754.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Rust is manual by design because people need to micro-manage resources. If you are experienced in it, it still takes a very little time to code your scenario. Obviously if you don't like the manual-ness of Rust, just use something else
755.
by pdimitar 2y ago
> But be sure to understand what you auto-completed. If not, stop and learn. But that's IMO exactly what your parent commenter says. Use LLMs only after you actually have a clue what are they producing. So if you are a beginner, b
756.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Curious to try this as most other tools have fairly stingy free tiers where you basically have one good interaction and boom, now you have to pay. (Zero analogies to drug dealers. Wink wink.) So can this be used standalone or must you use J
757.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Oh I agree. The Erlang/Elixir ecosystem is in danger of Rust inventing a BEAM-like runtime and making it irrelevant.
758.
by pdimitar 2y ago
> How would you write this idiomatically in Rust without using unsafe? Channels and selects. It's trivial.
759.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Nope, Elixir for backend. We need the BEAM VM's guarantees, not yesterday but like 20 years ago, everywhere. The language itself does not matter. But we need that runtime's guarantees!
760.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Why would it be an exaggerated claim? Try it yourself, from scratch, and see how quickly you will finish something that will rival and surpass, say, qBittorrent. None of the tasks is breaking new ground or is creatively difficult. But there
761.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Wow those are some extreme savings! Thank you, your comment went straight to favorites.
762.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Where can I read more?
763.
by pdimitar 2y ago
True, that's why I download VODs that are not gated behind subscription with yt-dlp. ...Those that are of interest anyway, which turned out to be less than 1% of what I thought. :D Twitch's player is indeed terrible and _loves_ to
764.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Or you can do it right and use Elixir's LiveView, from which everyone is getting inspired these days.
765.
by pdimitar 2y ago
> I just feel like I read a lot of "Rust is the only worthwhile language our there" Pay no attention to zealots. Every community has them. I love Rust beyond what's rational and I still am sensible enough to reject it fo
766.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Maybe check the others comments first, I already admitted I mistook LLVM for LLM.
767.
by pdimitar 2y ago
I get their reasoning and I admire the courage. But IMO they should have went with Rust -- smaller WASM binaries and even better memory footprint. And they said these were concerns. So IMO they didn't go far enough. But it's also
768.
by pdimitar 2y ago
And I did understand you. Point was that "fast enough" is definitely not good enough for a lot of other use cases, nothing else. If anything, that's kind of reinforcing your point. :)
769.
by pdimitar 2y ago
I see that I misread LLVM as LLM. My bad. Thanks.
770.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Oops, I severely misread LLVM as LLM!
771.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Uhhhh, I was talking about compilers however? Obviously a lot of what passes for "AI" these days is researched and created by academics.
772.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Okay, but how is that a reward? Maybe I wrongfully assumed we were talking about a money / material reward here.
773.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Only if you trace the chain of work back to its source, as far as I'm aware -- could be wrong. A lot of modern compilers don't seem to be directly done by academics though. If you know of such modern examples I'd be happy to
774.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Obviously. Anything that's being done without some analysis is downright dumb, RIIR included. Though to me it seems that a good percentage of those efforts will improve a general area. Still your point stands.
775.
by pdimitar 2y ago
Could be. Back then I didn't have any detailed docs on hand. It also wasn't the point. There was a number of completely unnecessary annoyances. Academics writing compilers actually seemed like a good idea to people back then. Stil
776.
by pdimitar 2y ago
What kinds of rewards were these that are not taxed?
777.
by pdimitar 2y ago
"Fast enough" is doing a lot of lifting in your argument. I've met plenty of embedded devs that said they'll only code either C or Rust and that nothing else comes close in terms of tooling / dev UX and speed. For a
778.
by pdimitar 2y ago
> And yet here we stand, still not having it replaced at scale. Network effects and business' risk aversion. Nothing to do with technical superiority / inferiority really. The MBAs only hear "we must replace everything f
779.
by pdimitar 2y ago
I clearly remember sighing deeply back in 2002 realizing I have to introduce yet another array type so my code could compile in Object Pascal. And this is just one example of many. Rust is objectively better than what I tried before, in sev
780.
by pdimitar 2y ago
What's your suggestion, exactly? Vetting code is extremely expensive in terms of human time and human energy. Sadly it's not only a problem for Rust, it's a problem for every single programming language out there.

More ›