Just in case the uninitiated might confuse this for a serious statement; to be clear he's completely trolling.
It is a species of trolling, designed to attract flaming responses and try to paint Rust proponents as arrogant, insufferable know-it-alls whose opinion can be safely dismissed. There's nothing factually wrong in that statement, it's all in the approach.
Non-trolling assessment would be that Rust's safety guarantees help, and help enormously, with the development of robust code, but are not a panacea. E.g., see the results of fuzzing some Rust programs and libraries: those are all bugs detected at runtime, not by the compiler. Note also that all except two, one segfault and one stack overflow, result in a controlled crash with a backtrace, which makes identifying the bug much easier.
It is also clear to everyone who's not a blind zealot that it's impracticable to re-implement every piece of code in Rust. Which doesn't mean that its use in places where it's felt that its safety could make a difference shouldn't be explored.
Came for the Rust trolls, was not disappointed. It's fascinating to see how they incorporate the latest developments into their narrative, and drop things which started sounding ridiculous even to those who don't follow Rust closely. If you want to know more about "some Rust code [that] apparently made its way into Firefox recently", which is the new styling engine, there's a nice high-to-mid-level presentation from one of the developers.
Rust was originally written in C, then a Rust compiler was written in C++. If the creators of Rust know about what makes a good programming language, and they chose to write Rust in C...
The original Rust compiler was written in OCaml. There was never an official C or C++ version of the front end. The backend of the self-hosted compiler is LLVM, written in C++.
Now most recently they have the front half of a Rust compiler written in Rust.
Rust has been self-hosting since about 2011, which is not "most recently" in my book. There is an independent front end written in C++, which generates LLVM IR and still needs the LLVM backend. It is also incomplete, since it lacks the borrow checker.
SSL_VERIFY_FAIL_IF_NO_PEER_CERT is easier to type by just holding down shift (turns out with my baby finger on my right hand) than pissing about with CAPS LOCK and shift.
Sure, if you want to contort your right hand, assuming touch typing the letters according to the rules of the QWERTY layout. The proper touch typing technique is to use the Shift opposite to the key you want shifted. Doing so with the given example, you'd need to switch the Shifts twelve times. I tried, and it wasn't much fun; I'd rather keep the Caps Lock.
If you forgo the customary technique, then yes, Caps Lock may be superfluous. I prefer not to.
Those costs are microscopic compared to the loss of sales from producing a CPU that doesn't run the operating systems and applications people actually want.
The first wave of RISC-V users had no intention to have it as a user-facing component. These days it's common for a SoC or a GPU to have its own orchestration/housekeeping CPU, and manufacturers would prefer to avoid ARM licensing cost for that. Nvidia is probably the highest-profile early user; a talk by one of their engineers goes into quite some detail.
I must have caught the very start of account registration purely by luck; I saw that I could open an account, said "why not", and got myself an initial-band-of-conspirators sort of UID. Once, my day would start with a visit to/., with frequent refreshes. I still lurk regularly, but the stories and comments are kind of... predictable. There's almost a retirement home kind of atmosphere around the place -- but maybe that's my twenty years older self projecting;)
Not necessarily. Latin homo can, and usually does, stand for "human being" in general. Male and female of the species are vir and mulier, respectively.
Quick goggle tells me that rust compiler is written in C.
That's why nobody seriously uses Goggle. Now if you tried Google, you'd get a snippet mentioning a "self-hosting compiler written in Rust" as the first result.
(Yes, Rust's code generation backend is LLVM, written in C++. Don't try to build strawmen out of this.)
FWIW, it seems CentOS 6 was not updated (though there is an SRPM from RHEL for it).
The update is in the CR repo because of the preparations for the release of CentOS 6.7. Short explanation here (with the link to the page explaining how to enable the additional repo), and a couple of longer explanations further down the thread.
The whole point of the Caps Lock key is that you don't have to press it over and over.
Whew, so I'm not the only one... But why is that point lost on the modern crowd? Is nobody a touch typist anymore? I've been taught that capital letters are typed by pressing the Shift key on the opposite side of the key being input, which gets ridiculous if you have to enter a longish string of capitals, e.g., echo $LD_LIBRARY_PATH (and no, I might not be in a shell which lets me autocomplete that one, thanks for asking). So CapsLock is far from useless. Dual Ctrls likewise, by analogy with dual Shifts -- I'd never contort my fingers by typing Ctrl-T or Ctrl-B single-handedly, even if Ctrl were in the usual CapsLock position (which some people obviously prefer.)
Are you under the mistaken impression that "open" means the source code is also free to re-use and distribute? It does not, contrary to how the FSF would like to redefine "open".
That's a misrepresentation of FSF's stance. They are the ones who grumble about using the term "open source", because they feel it's too loose, for exactly the reasons you have described.
China is always behind the curve. They didn't get nukes until the 1970's.
In the interest of accuracy -- the first Chinese nuclear test was in 1964, and they exploded their first thermonuclear device in 1967. So no, not the '70s.
AIX is UNIX Done Right. It's the kind of UNIX that doesn't fuck around. It just goddamn works, and it works really well.
Unless much has changed with AIX, this quote still applies. I used to coddle some AIX servers in the 4.2-4.3 timeframe, and can vouch for the truthfulness of the quote. AIX is... strange. Though, in fairness, they did have LVM done right.
Control the populous with fear! Let's figure out a way to make them even more afraid of nuclear power so we can continue selling snakeoil solutions like solar and wind energy products.
The "populous" (ObGrammarNazi: it's "populace" in this case), as represented by the thieves of those radiation sources, has already demonstrated how informed and afraid it is: not much. How you can equate medical/industrial isotope capsules with nuclear power generation is another question. (Hint: you really can't, but it's so difficult to pass an opportunity for trolling, right?)
Actually, she [Queen E.] is the only one with the power to "enact" legislation. Parliament cannot create laws without her consent. She can therefore refuse to sign any legislation she objects to, and she has on occasion done so (typically tax laws that affect her personal wealth. Yeah.)
Citation badly needed. The procedure you've described is called Royal Assent, and has been a formality for ages; the last time it was withheld was... wait for it... in 1708. Yes, in theory Her Maj could veto a law, but that would be the end of her political meddling, if not the monarchy itself.
So the guy is a pro biker and does a lot of his biking in scenarios that actually ought to be safer for bikes than riding the city streets. And he still gets banged up frequently.
Pro bike road racing is "safer" inasmuch as the peloton doesn't mix with regular traffic. That's it. Ask anyone who's been following bike racing with any regularity: crashes are a fact of life. And a broken collarbone is a typical cycling injury. You might even say that a racer who didn't smash a collarbone in his career didn't have much of a career in the first place.
Once, some well known "C" developer, post an article about the current version of the Pascal programming version. Contrary to the Pascal community beliefs, the article had a lot of good critical points.
So, the main "Pascal" developer, added or changed features, and, the newer versions, allow to do everything, that was missing.
This sounds like a garbled reference to Kernighan's Why Pascal is Not My Favorite Programming Language. The title is drily amusing, and the points made in the article are technically true, but I can't help thinking that the dissing of Pascal is a bit disingenuous and/or missing the point. The language wasn't even designed for system programming, but as a teaching aid. Its popularity far outside the original remit just underscores the dearth of sane high-level languages at the time.
Anyway, Wirth didn't tweak Pascal; he designed a completely new language, Modula-2, which, by the way, happened before Kernighan's article.
Slashdot Mirror
Just in case the uninitiated might confuse this for a serious statement; to be clear he's completely trolling.
It is a species of trolling, designed to attract flaming responses and try to paint Rust proponents as arrogant, insufferable know-it-alls whose opinion can be safely dismissed. There's nothing factually wrong in that statement, it's all in the approach.
Non-trolling assessment would be that Rust's safety guarantees help, and help enormously, with the development of robust code, but are not a panacea. E.g., see the results of fuzzing some Rust programs and libraries: those are all bugs detected at runtime, not by the compiler. Note also that all except two, one segfault and one stack overflow, result in a controlled crash with a backtrace, which makes identifying the bug much easier.
It is also clear to everyone who's not a blind zealot that it's impracticable to re-implement every piece of code in Rust. Which doesn't mean that its use in places where it's felt that its safety could make a difference shouldn't be explored.
Came for the Rust trolls, was not disappointed. It's fascinating to see how they incorporate the latest developments into their narrative, and drop things which started sounding ridiculous even to those who don't follow Rust closely. If you want to know more about "some Rust code [that] apparently made its way into Firefox recently", which is the new styling engine, there's a nice high-to-mid-level presentation from one of the developers.
Rust was originally written in C, then a Rust compiler was written in C++. If the creators of Rust know about what makes a good programming language, and they chose to write Rust in C ...
The original Rust compiler was written in OCaml. There was never an official C or C++ version of the front end. The backend of the self-hosted compiler is LLVM, written in C++.
Now most recently they have the front half of a Rust compiler written in Rust.
Rust has been self-hosting since about 2011, which is not "most recently" in my book. There is an independent front end written in C++, which generates LLVM IR and still needs the LLVM backend. It is also incomplete, since it lacks the borrow checker.
SSL_VERIFY_FAIL_IF_NO_PEER_CERT is easier to type by just holding down shift (turns out with my baby finger on my right hand) than pissing about with CAPS LOCK and shift.
Sure, if you want to contort your right hand, assuming touch typing the letters according to the rules of the QWERTY layout. The proper touch typing technique is to use the Shift opposite to the key you want shifted. Doing so with the given example, you'd need to switch the Shifts twelve times. I tried, and it wasn't much fun; I'd rather keep the Caps Lock.
If you forgo the customary technique, then yes, Caps Lock may be superfluous. I prefer not to.
Can't think of a single time I've ever really needed [Caps Lock], let alone need it often enough to give it a big chunk of prime real estate.
Every time I have to type something like SSL_VERIFY_FAIL_IF_NO_PEER_CERT I remember the Caps-Lockoclasts and chuckle to myself.
Those costs are microscopic compared to the loss of sales from producing a CPU that doesn't run the operating systems and applications people actually want.
The first wave of RISC-V users had no intention to have it as a user-facing component. These days it's common for a SoC or a GPU to have its own orchestration/housekeeping CPU, and manufacturers would prefer to avoid ARM licensing cost for that. Nvidia is probably the highest-profile early user; a talk by one of their engineers goes into quite some detail.
I must have caught the very start of account registration purely by luck; I saw that I could open an account, said "why not", and got myself an initial-band-of-conspirators sort of UID. Once, my day would start with a visit to /., with frequent refreshes. I still lurk regularly, but the stories and comments are kind of... predictable. There's almost a retirement home kind of atmosphere around the place -- but maybe that's my twenty years older self projecting ;)
Isn't ad hominem literally sexist?
Not necessarily. Latin homo can, and usually does, stand for "human being" in general. Male and female of the species are vir and mulier, respectively.
Quick goggle tells me that rust compiler is written in C.
That's why nobody seriously uses Goggle. Now if you tried Google, you'd get a snippet mentioning a "self-hosting compiler written in Rust" as the first result.
(Yes, Rust's code generation backend is LLVM, written in C++. Don't try to build strawmen out of this.)
There are still some two-digit UID lurkers. I must admit I haven't seen a single-digit UID for a very long time.
Android got where it is by being open.
Typical Slashtard. Outside of this site, almost NO ONE cares that Android is "Open" (which it is actually NOT).
The phone manfacturers do, and for them it's enough that Android is more open than iOS (which it actually IS, for any reasonable definition of open).
Android got to where it is by being on every cheap-ass FREE handset around, PERIOD. FULL STOP.
So, pray tell, what made those cheap-ass handsets possible?
Economists with an ideological bent make things up with no relationship to the real world and people believe them.
It's an old, but relevant, joke:
The First Law of Economics: For every economist, there exists an equal and opposite economist.
The Second Law of Economics: They're both wrong.
FWIW, it seems CentOS 6 was not updated (though there is an SRPM from RHEL for it).
The update is in the CR repo because of the preparations for the release of CentOS 6.7. Short explanation here (with the link to the page explaining how to enable the additional repo), and a couple of longer explanations further down the thread.
The whole point of the Caps Lock key is that you don't have to press it over and over.
Whew, so I'm not the only one... But why is that point lost on the modern crowd? Is nobody a touch typist anymore? I've been taught that capital letters are typed by pressing the Shift key on the opposite side of the key being input, which gets ridiculous if you have to enter a longish string of capitals, e.g., echo $LD_LIBRARY_PATH (and no, I might not be in a shell which lets me autocomplete that one, thanks for asking). So CapsLock is far from useless. Dual Ctrls likewise, by analogy with dual Shifts -- I'd never contort my fingers by typing Ctrl-T or Ctrl-B single-handedly, even if Ctrl were in the usual CapsLock position (which some people obviously prefer.)
Are you under the mistaken impression that "open" means the source code is also free to re-use and distribute? It does not, contrary to how the FSF would like to redefine "open".
That's a misrepresentation of FSF's stance. They are the ones who grumble about using the term "open source", because they feel it's too loose, for exactly the reasons you have described.
China is always behind the curve. They didn't get nukes until the 1970's.
In the interest of accuracy -- the first Chinese nuclear test was in 1964, and they exploded their first thermonuclear device in 1967. So no, not the '70s.
Post to undo mismoderation. Ignore.
AIX is UNIX Done Right. It's the kind of UNIX that doesn't fuck around. It just goddamn works, and it works really well.
Unless much has changed with AIX, this quote still applies. I used to coddle some AIX servers in the 4.2-4.3 timeframe, and can vouch for the truthfulness of the quote. AIX is... strange. Though, in fairness, they did have LVM done right.
Post to undo fat-fingered mod. Ignore.
Posting to undo bad mod.
Control the populous with fear! Let's figure out a way to make them even more afraid of nuclear power so we can continue selling snakeoil solutions like solar and wind energy products.
The "populous" (ObGrammarNazi: it's "populace" in this case), as represented by the thieves of those radiation sources, has already demonstrated how informed and afraid it is: not much. How you can equate medical/industrial isotope capsules with nuclear power generation is another question. (Hint: you really can't, but it's so difficult to pass an opportunity for trolling, right?)
Actually, she [Queen E.] is the only one with the power to "enact" legislation. Parliament cannot create laws without her consent. She can therefore refuse to sign any legislation she objects to, and she has on occasion done so (typically tax laws that affect her personal wealth. Yeah.)
Citation badly needed. The procedure you've described is called Royal Assent, and has been a formality for ages; the last time it was withheld was... wait for it... in 1708. Yes, in theory Her Maj could veto a law, but that would be the end of her political meddling, if not the monarchy itself.
So the guy is a pro biker and does a lot of his biking in scenarios that actually ought to be safer for bikes than riding the city streets. And he still gets banged up frequently.
Pro bike road racing is "safer" inasmuch as the peloton doesn't mix with regular traffic. That's it. Ask anyone who's been following bike racing with any regularity: crashes are a fact of life. And a broken collarbone is a typical cycling injury. You might even say that a racer who didn't smash a collarbone in his career didn't have much of a career in the first place.
Argh, posting to undo a fat-finger downmod.
Once, some well known "C" developer, post an article about the current version of the Pascal programming version. Contrary to the Pascal community beliefs, the article had a lot of good critical points.
So, the main "Pascal" developer, added or changed features, and, the newer versions, allow to do everything, that was missing.
This sounds like a garbled reference to Kernighan's Why Pascal is Not My Favorite Programming Language. The title is drily amusing, and the points made in the article are technically true, but I can't help thinking that the dissing of Pascal is a bit disingenuous and/or missing the point. The language wasn't even designed for system programming, but as a teaching aid. Its popularity far outside the original remit just underscores the dearth of sane high-level languages at the time.
Anyway, Wirth didn't tweak Pascal; he designed a completely new language, Modula-2, which, by the way, happened before Kernighan's article.