vore

42 ms·

511.
by vore 4y ago
Well, what do you suggest would help? You haven't really addressed if these people are right or wrong, just that they're all angry, and it's somehow not okay for a lot of people to be angry at the same time and talk about it
512.
by vore 4y ago
No, but this is why we have things like linear types or encapsulating side effects in a state monad to describe these kinds of strict sequencings. I personally think pure functional programming is still very unergonomic but referential tran
513.
by vore 4y ago
Some people like being nice and that's great! However, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong in authors who put their blood and sweat into the software they write and expecting some kind of concession for it. If tha
514.
by vore 4y ago
Isn't the whole purpose of this to have the information, that is, the Voice.ai source, be free?
515.
by vore 4y ago
If the bugs are unexpected then it's hard to understand what it does :-)
516.
by vore 4y ago
I think C is misleadingly easy: it's easy to reason about, say, a single function body since there's only so many things you can even write in C. But when you start composing things together and juggling the lifetimes of various t
517.
by vore 4y ago
I want to like Go but the language is designed such that writing it requires a lot of discipline to not do something silly by accident: https://www.uber.com/blog/data-race-patterns-in-go/
518.
by vore 4y ago
CompCert doesn't stop you from writing memory unsafe C, of course, just that it won't miscompile your maybe memory unsafe C.
519.
by vore 4y ago
seL4 also has the whole Isabelle/HOL theorem prover to verify its properties, so it's not quite right to claim it's written in C. If you can claim seL4 is "written in C", you could equally claim that if the Rust com
520.
by vore 4y ago
That's not what a transformer model is: a transformer model is just one that uses self-attention blocks in its layers to encode contextual information about the input. A non-transformer model can equally translate from one representati
521.
by vore 4y ago
In an async function, the only guarantee you have is that code between two await points is not interruptible. As you have more and more async operations, this guarantee gets pretty weak (if you have more than one pending async task and the
522.
by vore 4y ago
I think async/await is just noise: if you already have a heavy runtime like JavaScript or Python does (I forgive Rust for this one because it's so tied to reducing runtime overhead), you might as well handwave the distinction betw
523.
by vore 4y ago
JavaScript has Promise.race, which is effectively the same thing (from a set of Promises, return as soon as the first one resolves).
524.
by vore 4y ago
Concurrency is not parallelism: - Concurrency is making overlapping progress on two or more tasks. - Parallelism is making simultaneous progress on two or more tasks. Concurrent tasks can run in parallel, but they can also run not in para
525.
by vore 4y ago
You might as well avoid wrapping the types and just split the writer and reader: it's good practice to do this anyway, since you probably only need one half of the oneshot channel on each side and having a handle to something that can
526.
by vore 4y ago
The article contradicts your point but justifies itself by just handwaving over it: > So called green hydrogen has its own problems. Yes, it is technically possible to use renewably-produced electricity to electrolyse water, to make hydr
527.
by vore 4y ago
It's not a protection racket at all: you can go apply the patches yourself from upstream. See https://canonical.com/blog/open-source-security-with-ubuntu-... . > Alongside Ubuntu itself, each of these applicatio
528.
by vore 4y ago
Well, yeah. This has always been the case, but now you can pay to not have this be the case. They're not taking anything away. If you had these concerns about the universe repo before Ubuntu Pro, you should not have been using it in t
529.
by vore 4y ago
If this were true, this would have been a problem a long time ago. Why would Microsoft wait such a long time to change this when under your assumption it would have been a continuous legal liability?
530.
by vore 4y ago
Do you like that police unions provide cover for police misconduct? Guess what, progressives don't. Just because something bills itself as a union doesn't mean progressives are compelled to like it.
531.
by vore 4y ago
This argument is in such bad faith it's hilarious. Here's my much better argument: Instead of using dynamic typing, eating babies reduces the incidence of bugs in code by 1000x. If you don't believe me and would like me to ci
532.
by vore 4y ago
I don't really buy this idea of "thinking for yourself". We are nothing more than the product of our experiences: there are no axioms at the root of at any of our beliefs; fundamentally everything that goes through our heads
533.
by vore 4y ago
Poe's law, etc.
534.
by vore 4y ago
Kind of ironic he starts off with "I try to write using ordinary words and simple sentences" then dedicates an entire paragraph to making up an Italian word that really doesn't add anything to his point.
535.
by vore 4y ago
I don’t think it’s so bad since conversion to &Path is pretty trivial. Conversely, impl AsRef<Path> can move the argument even though it only really needs a borrow, which is kind of funky (both PathBuf and &PathBuf are AsRef&l
536.
by vore 4y ago
One thing I wish was better was block-scoped ?. I know there's https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/unstable-book/language-featur... so you can do e.g. let foo: Result<T, Error> = try { x()?;
537.
by vore 4y ago
The thing about the inner function is something I didn't know about and while I understand the motivation and need it definitely feels a little goofy. But if you're passing impl AsRef<Path> just to pass it as a &Path to
538.
by vore 4y ago
But do you need this in the 99% of cases? Probably not. You can write productive, performant, and safe code in safe Rust fine. If you do need to do something this exotic, the fundamentals don't change: you still need to take care of me
539.
by vore 4y ago
As someone who has done kernel development work (though not Linux), not every part of a kernel is as filled with dragons as you make it out to be. Why would my e.g. filesystem driver need to punch a lot of deep unsafe holes down to the inte
540.
by vore 4y ago
I felt this way about Rust for a really long time, but after sitting down and doing a few projects with Rust I've really come to appreciate how much the language stops me from being a dumbass.

More ›