Nope. Not the Shuttle. You Musk nuts are incredibly ignorant of even recent history. No one you think everything he announces is astounding. Plus you guys all turned into space accountants all of a sudden.
Of course it is the first practical one, because it has no real value, and is not a very useful thing to do so companies didn't feel the need to pursue it. My point is it isn't an amazing accomplishment, because it was demonstrated 25 years ago. It is amazing how Musk has such a cult following. He announces a 1 mile tunnel and it makes the world news. Even though...it is a tunnel. He launches a satellite and people act like no one has ever launched a satellite before. He builds a crappy hyperloop (an idea that was rejected by sensible people over 100 years ago) and the techonuts drool over it.
You are easily impressed by the cult of Musk. People have been launching satellites for many decades. The Voyager probe is out of the solar system and that was launched in 1977. Why people are impressed by launching commercial junk into space is beyond me.
Dwave also has developed a 1000 qubit quantum computer. And Musk is building a hyperloop tunnel system and a Mars colony. And soon we will have AI and self-driving cars. We live in exciting times, my friends.
You need to give it up. No one is going to use Swift. Ever. Language zealots are funny. There is a reason certain languages are popular, and things like Rust and Swift are not.
"you could write a graphics driver or a kernel in Rust with little or no performance penalty versus C. You could probably write one in Go."
No you couldn't and have it perform acceptably. That is why people don't do it. Amazingly, there are many people that actually know what they are doing, but don't do what you say. That is how you know you are wrong (even though you clearly have a high opinion of yourself).
Right. So use managed pointers and bounds checked accessor functions. That has nothing to do with C++. If you don't program safely you won't have safe programs, no matter what language you use.
If you are using char * in 2018 you don't know what you are doing. That has nothing to do with C++. You can write unsafe programs in managed languages as well. It is just no one really uses things like Rust, so people haven't experienced it yet.
America doesn't own space. What right do they have to give permission anyway? Space belongs to all of us. When we go to Mars we aren't taking America with us. I mean "USians" of course, not America, because America is a continent, not a country.
Do why don't you move on from C/C++? I mean you are bright, very qualified engineer who has identified the problem. Why haven't you fixed it. I already know the answer, so don't bother responding.
I don't understand. C/C++ compilers have had options to enforce boundary checking for over 10 years now (at least). Are people really unaware of these things?
Um, I am pretty sure all compilers have these kinds of flags already. I know Microsoft's had that 10 years ago. GCC has dozens of flags for overflow detection, etc. Rust developers are just ignorant Millenials who think they have discovered something new.
Um, I've never heard someone way that it was expected a program can crash because it was written in C/C++. Any program can crash, no matter what language you write it in. How does Rust keep programs from "crashing" (a.k.a stopping abnormally) if there is a non-recoverable error in them? You can catch exceptions probably, but you can do that in C++ as well. The reason your Rust programs don't crash is because they are typically trivial demo programs. There is nothing magical about Rust. You can reduce buffer overflow errors with languages like that, but you can also do that if you use semi-modern C++.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. Not the Shuttle. You Musk nuts are incredibly ignorant of even recent history. No one you think everything he announces is astounding. Plus you guys all turned into space accountants all of a sudden.
Not everything in this world revolves around money. You should learn that.
Of course it is the first practical one, because it has no real value, and is not a very useful thing to do so companies didn't feel the need to pursue it. My point is it isn't an amazing accomplishment, because it was demonstrated 25 years ago. It is amazing how Musk has such a cult following. He announces a 1 mile tunnel and it makes the world news. Even though...it is a tunnel. He launches a satellite and people act like no one has ever launched a satellite before. He builds a crappy hyperloop (an idea that was rejected by sensible people over 100 years ago) and the techonuts drool over it.
You are easily impressed by the cult of Musk. People have been launching satellites for many decades. The Voyager probe is out of the solar system and that was launched in 1977. Why people are impressed by launching commercial junk into space is beyond me.
Hate to break it to you guys, but reusable rockets were demonstrated over 25 years ago. Yeah, I know, amazing stuff.
Cool! I didn't know we could put satellites in geosynchronous orbit too! The wonders of 2018!
Dwave also has developed a 1000 qubit quantum computer. And Musk is building a hyperloop tunnel system and a Mars colony. And soon we will have AI and self-driving cars. We live in exciting times, my friends.
In modern C/C++ compilers you will also get a stacktrace. I think the problem is that you haven't learned anything since 1998.
Then don't use them. I don't myself.
Then don't write code like that. I don't know anyone who writes C++ like that. You can write obfuscated code in any language.
Yeah, like I said it sucks to have to learn new stuff.
Yeah, no. Rust ranks below Puppet in popularity. There is a reason no one uses your languages.
You need to give it up. No one is going to use Swift. Ever. Language zealots are funny. There is a reason certain languages are popular, and things like Rust and Swift are not.
"you could write a graphics driver or a kernel in Rust with little or no performance penalty versus C. You could probably write one in Go."
No you couldn't and have it perform acceptably. That is why people don't do it. Amazingly, there are many people that actually know what they are doing, but don't do what you say. That is how you know you are wrong (even though you clearly have a high opinion of yourself).
Right. So use managed pointers and bounds checked accessor functions. That has nothing to do with C++. If you don't program safely you won't have safe programs, no matter what language you use.
If you are using char * in 2018 you don't know what you are doing. That has nothing to do with C++. You can write unsafe programs in managed languages as well. It is just no one really uses things like Rust, so people haven't experienced it yet.
Or the software was written before this was available. People forget a lot of this software is very very old.
Wow. Launching satellites into LEO. Who knew this would be possible? We truly live in the Space Age.
America doesn't own space. What right do they have to give permission anyway? Space belongs to all of us. When we go to Mars we aren't taking America with us. I mean "USians" of course, not America, because America is a continent, not a country.
Nontrivial programs crash no matter what language you are using. Most nontrivial programs are written in C/C++.
Do why don't you move on from C/C++? I mean you are bright, very qualified engineer who has identified the problem. Why haven't you fixed it. I already know the answer, so don't bother responding.
I don't understand. C/C++ compilers have had options to enforce boundary checking for over 10 years now (at least). Are people really unaware of these things?
Yeah it sucks having to learn new things, doesn't it?
Um, I am pretty sure all compilers have these kinds of flags already. I know Microsoft's had that 10 years ago. GCC has dozens of flags for overflow detection, etc. Rust developers are just ignorant Millenials who think they have discovered something new.
Um, I've never heard someone way that it was expected a program can crash because it was written in C/C++. Any program can crash, no matter what language you write it in. How does Rust keep programs from "crashing" (a.k.a stopping abnormally) if there is a non-recoverable error in them? You can catch exceptions probably, but you can do that in C++ as well. The reason your Rust programs don't crash is because they are typically trivial demo programs. There is nothing magical about Rust. You can reduce buffer overflow errors with languages like that, but you can also do that if you use semi-modern C++.