ssokolow

16 ms·

121.
by ssokolow 6y ago
> * It's much more irregular to decode than other instruction sets/IRs According to this blog post, it's not just "much more irregular to decode", instruction deciding is the Achilles Heel of x86 which allows M
122.
by ssokolow 6y ago
Of course, the hazard is that you then have to deal with offering a value proposition that's still appealing after adjusting for your target userbase having to give up all the plugins and tweaks they configured into their editors. htt
123.
by ssokolow 6y ago
What attitude? The "Generally, people who actually know what they're talking about"? I could have phrased it better, but "Rewrite it in Rust" IS a bit of a groaner in the Rust community because of the history of h
124.
by ssokolow 6y ago
> I really don't get the whole "rewrite it in Rust" thing at all, especially when 95% of those applications would be perfectly performant in a language that lets you focus on your domain, not on making the borrow-checker h
125.
by ssokolow 6y ago
It sounds like you're making it a requirement that a language should be tightly coupled to a specific application framework (or at least a specific event loop and fat standard library). Is that correct? (If so, it's a perspective
126.
by ssokolow 6y ago
Unfortunately, `rustfmt.toml` isn't expressive enough, even on nightly. I've had to make use of `rustfmt::skip` in various places to keep it from doing things like mangling the groupings and explanatory comments in `const` arrays
127.
by ssokolow 6y ago
That's like saying "There's nothing wrong with using setjmp/longjmp. It's part of the standard." I firmly believe that you shouldn't need client-side JavaScript for anything fancier than things like progre
128.
by ssokolow 6y ago
Fair point. The Copy on u32 and lack of Copy on String is confusing until you've grasped that things containing heap allocations are ineligible for Copy, and that Copy is primarily intended for data types the same size as or smaller
129.
by ssokolow 6y ago
Since I haven't seen anyone cover it from quite this perspective, here's how I saw what led to things blowing up like that: What really got people riled up was that... 1. Nikolay refused to acknowledge the principle (stated in the
130.
by ssokolow 6y ago
You could give this a try combined with something like the ungoogled-chromium PPA: sudo apt-get autoremove snapd sudo apt-mark hold snapd (I use apt-mark and some custom scripting to defer nVidia driver updates until system boo
131.
by ssokolow 7y ago
You're the second person I've seen approach that "Anytime something is hard or inconvenient, it's because the underlying domain really is exactly that hard or inconvenient." point in the last little while. Have you
132.
by ssokolow 7y ago
But it's not just "code on github". It has the very professional-looking https://actix.rs/ and so on.
133.
by ssokolow 7y ago
> if there’s one thing I’ve learned from writing software, it’s to blog about error messages. I hope I'm not the only one who just realized that "A Sad Day for Rust" is also an example of "[blogging] about error messa
134.
by ssokolow 7y ago
However, everything has its downsides. For example: > 1. YOU are responsible for your dependencies. This contributes to the prejudice against `unsafe`. If I wanted to be a full-time auditor, I wouldn't be steering clear of C and C++
135.
by ssokolow 7y ago
I think that https://actix.rs/ counts as an implicit "the author doesn't intend this to be seen as a toy project" in people's eyes.
136.
by ssokolow 7y ago
From what I saw, the problem wasn't response time but response tone . If he'd said "I'll write my own solution" rather than calling it boring, his response wouldn't have been a problem.
137.
by ssokolow 7y ago
However, that disclaimer exists in all major open-source licenses, including all such software explicitly marketed such that a Reasonable Person (in the legal sense) would interpret it as a statement of fitness for purpose. Thus, the disc
138.
by ssokolow 7y ago
Wepeat Evewy Time -- Elmer Fudd's programming acronyms
139.
by ssokolow 7y ago
Mainly that, for any portions written in Python, I can't rely on Rust's type system to help me catch mistakes at compile time. ...though Qt's QTest module does help to balance things out a bit, by providing a Selenium-like fa
140.
by ssokolow 7y ago
That depends on your requirements. As I mentioned in another comment, I value my GUIs feeling native on my KDE desktop (and not having to reinvent things like QSettings and, last time I tried with GTK+ 2.x, drag-and-drop multi-select for li
141.
by ssokolow 7y ago
While i'm not vbsteven, I can probably give a useful answer to your question. As a KDE user, QML is about as useful to me as GTK+ when it comes to feeling native, so bindings built around those APIs are out. rust-qt-binding-generator (
142.
by ssokolow 7y ago
In the GTK+ 2.x era, I would have agreed with you. GTK+ was either the basis for or easily themeable to feel reasonably native under any Linux desktop environment and, because of the applications which depend on it, pretty much everyone is
143.
by ssokolow 10y ago
I prefer to think of the difference being "In classical inheritance, verbs are members of nouns, but, in Rust, you define your nouns and verbs as distinct top-level identities, then define the valid relationships between them." Th
144.
by ssokolow 10y ago
It's a pattern that's been well documented in the scientific community. You generally get a burst of innovation when enough of an older generation of scientists dies off for their ossified cognitive habits to stop holding back the
145.
by ssokolow 10y ago
From what I remember, it just uses GLib's system for implementing reference-counted pointers in C and is equivalent to using Rc<T> or Arc<T> everywhere in Rust.
146.
by ssokolow 10y ago
> No it really isn't, static linking does not imply bloat as commonly perpetuated. I never said it implied bloat. I said that, if you ask Rust to link dynamically despite the lack of a stable ABI, you'll get binaries of a size
147.
by ssokolow 10y ago
Actually, the culprit is Rust's decision to statically link its standard library and all its dependencies by default. Things like libunwind, libbacktrace, embedded debugging symbols for backtraces, and the jemalloc allocator aren'
148.
by ssokolow 10y ago
You're forgetting the elephant in the room: undefined behaviour. Sure, you can target one compiler and be sure you'll be generating the desired machine instructions, but it can be much more difficult to ensure that your code will
149.
by ssokolow 10y ago
That's also the direction Linux is heading with Flatpak and Flatpak portals. I'm excited because there will finally be a reliable way for me to apply my preferred Open/Save dialogs to KDE and GTK+ apps alike. (It's being
150.
by ssokolow 10y ago
I'd argue that talking about C's simplicity requires one big caveat... it gains that simplicity by delegating a lot of essential complexity to the underlying platform and the spec leaves a lot of details up to the compiler writers

More ›