withoutboats

7 ms·

1.
by withoutboats 7y ago
This touches on some interesting history: lifetimes were originally (in other PL literature) called "regions" (MS Research's Verona also uses this terminology). Lifetime was chosen because an analogy to time seemed more intui
2.
by withoutboats 7y ago
This is sort of the problem: its very natural to refer to that as a lifetime! In fact, more natural than the lifetime of a reference, because we intuitively think of variables as being "alive" and references as being short-term &q
3.
by withoutboats 7y ago
Your post suggests a bit of confusion about the meaning of "lifetime" in Rust - a confusion which is common and why we are somewhat unhappy with how that terminology has played out. Variables don't have a "lifetime,&quot
4.
by withoutboats 7y ago
I don't want to be defensive but this is completely off base, and very disheartening to see you post. Allowing users to write safe self-referential code was never a design goal of Pin - only to make it safe to manipulate self-referenti
5.
by withoutboats 7y ago
This situation is the sad and absurd result of two processes going on in the Rust community. The first is that the Rust community on Reddit is in a feedback loop of groupthink and outrage, making it into a powerful vector for harassment. Th
6.
by withoutboats 7y ago
There's miles between understanding pinning well enough to call `Box::pin` (a safe API) and understanding pinning well enough to call `Pin::get_mut_unchecked` (an unsafe API). When we talk about understanding pinning, we mean the latte
7.
by withoutboats 7y ago
There is a huge gradient of use cases between "high level web frameworks" and "writing everything from scratch" and we've thought about the impact on users at every step of that gradient. But I'm not about to e
8.
by withoutboats 7y ago
The syntax is different but Rust has this feature- its called auto traits, and its how we handle traits related to threadsafety. Its not a solution for what Pin solves because the whole notion that a type might be moveable or not moveable i
9.
by withoutboats 7y ago
The name for that reference type is a shared reference. It's literally the default reference type. It's not a sufficient guarantee for the use cases Pin supports.
10.
by withoutboats 7y ago
This is exactly the kind of comment that makes me dislike Hacker News so strongly, because I find it endemic here. The idea that someone could think an issue is theoretical and then discover it is practically significant is obvious and no i
11.
by withoutboats 7y ago
(and the idea I was expressing was "shared references never under any circumstance implement the DerefMut trait")
12.
by withoutboats 7y ago
No one has ever proposed a solution - first class or not - which wouldn't be significantly more invasive and infectious. Does it sound fun in code that doesn't have anything to do with futures to spend time worrying if this generi
13.
by withoutboats 7y ago
This was certainly not our intention, or what I've heard from users.
14.
by withoutboats 7y ago
(I was the primary designer of the Pin API.) Since (to a first approximation) every individual who has the expertise and contextual knowledge to really evaluate this issue is a poster on internals.rust-lang.org, its pretty surprising to fin
15.
by withoutboats 7y ago
Thankyou.
16.
by withoutboats 7y ago
Mods: This user's posting history makes clear they are an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. Why have you not banned them? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20972062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?
17.
by withoutboats 7y ago
I won't be doing that.
18.
by withoutboats 7y ago
You seem like a really unpleasant person and it doesn't really seem worth my time to interact with you, but I want to point out that your post actually contains no relevant information: "to post as I have done" is a tautologi
19.
by withoutboats 7y ago
It's pretty obvious that this person has essentially lied: they have not implemented the complex features they claim while they hype benefits like compile time and lack of non-zero cost features that will have to disappear when they ha
20.
by withoutboats 7y ago
The user is the programmer in this context, the user of the programming language, not the end user of the program.
21.
by withoutboats 7y ago
This is the sort of comment on hacker news I absolutely love: I know one of us is sitting in a place of ignorant hubris, and I doubt its me. The problems I refer to are, as I stated in the post, UX problems, and they arise ultimately from R
22.
Garbage collection as a Rust library(boats.gitlab.io)
8 points by withoutboats 8y ago|0 comments
23.
by withoutboats 8y ago
The difference between &str and String is one of my least favorite parts of Rust, but I made your code compile with some pretty trivial changes: https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=66789a8e86e3c2fd1803adc4bec...
24.
by withoutboats 8y ago
This is the sort of really impressively shallow and baseless analysis that makes Hacker News so enjoyable to read. These two blog posts have really nothing to do with one another, are describing unrelated problems with unrelated things, s
25.
by withoutboats 8y ago
It's C. I assume the programmer would just be responsible for dealing with dangling pointers and double frees.
26.
by withoutboats 8y ago
It can be! And arguably people have leaned too hard on the decisions made in the std as an example: in std, everything is generic so that it can be inlined well, because std APIs underlie everything. At the application layer, this is not ob
27.
by withoutboats 8y ago
I think that there is not a definition of the Monad trait - not just undesirable, not possible - that can abstract over all Futures and Iterators as implemented in Rust . You would have to use some kind of trait object & lose the incre
28.
by withoutboats 8y ago
To clarify, we don't use LLVM's implementation of coroutines. We have our own implementation in rustc.
29.
by withoutboats 8y ago
Here are three problems: Higher kinded polymorphism results in trivially undecidable type inferences without something like currying; the restrictions needed to support it would be arbitrary and weird given that Rust does not have currying
30.
by withoutboats 8y ago
The first part of your comment is unresponsive to mine; the last part is pretty rude & factually wrong (we are not motivated to implement an effect system right now; we understand the theory). Sticking to the first part: an effect sys

More ›