subreddit stringclasses 7
values | author stringlengths 3 20 | id stringlengths 5 7 | content stringlengths 67 30.4k | score int64 0 140k |
|---|---|---|---|---|
programmingcirclejerk | F54280 | fji4wek | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>> over 80% of developers are positively satisfied with other subsystems
Are the other 20% negatively satisfied ?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 19 |
programmingcirclejerk | three18ti | fjhxowq | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>See, Dart, like Go, is a retro language. One doesn't handle generics, the other won't fully support Unicode, which allow programmers to get that vintage feeling from the 80s, 90s and 00s.<|eor|><|sor|>It's the working around limitations that helps you be _creative_!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | camelCaseIsWebScale | fji09e3 | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|><|eor|><|sor|>You have hidden complexity there<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
programmingcirclejerk | ketralnis | fjhmx7b | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>> encountered an issue with unicode characters that require two bytes to express, such as emojis
emoji start at U+1F600 which is a number that I can't fit in two bytes. Is Dart byte bigger than a normal byte?<|eor|><|sor|>Yeah, it uses bbyytteess, which are actually capable of doubling information density. I'm amazed you hadn't heard<|eor|><|sor|>Named by the same people that want you to unironically say gibabyte<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | LIL-BAN-EVASION | fjiiv9x | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>> all flutter developers
Pretty big accomplishment to survey every last one of their users tho<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 14 |
programmingcirclejerk | YuriKlastalov | fjin6oe | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>> encountered an issue with unicode characters that require two bytes to express, such as emojis
emoji start at U+1F600 which is a number that I can't fit in two bytes. Is Dart byte bigger than a normal byte?<|eor|><|sor|>> encountered an issue with unicode characters that require two bytes to express, such as emojis
/uj unless they mean characters with exactly two bytes, and not two or more (and even then tbh), this is such a fucking big bug, and they paint it like a small obscure technicality lmao, like how did no one notice it until now, literally any accented letter needs two bytes
"We literally just support ASCII, and not even the extended set" wtf.<|eor|><|sor|>127 characters ought to be enough for anybody.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 14 |
programmingcirclejerk | duckbill_principate | fjipr3b | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>Ahh yes. Flutter... where async is a UI widget category:
https://flutter.dev/docs/development/ui/widgets<|eor|><|sor|>Category? Does Flutter have monads?<|eor|><|sor|>Yes, there is an Accessibility widget<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | ketralnis | fjhvavy | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|>> encountered an issue with unicode characters that require two bytes to express, such as emojis
emoji start at U+1F600 which is a number that I can't fit in two bytes. Is Dart byte bigger than a normal byte?<|eor|><|sor|>Yeah, it uses bbyytteess, which are actually capable of doubling information density. I'm amazed you hadn't heard<|eor|><|sor|>Named by the same people that want you to unironically say gibabyte<|eor|><|sor|>Is that an ironic spelling of gibibyte?<|eor|><|sor|>found him<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | homeworkkanyewest | fjj1vgj | <|sols|><|sot|>0.6% of all Flutter developers didn't ship their app because Dart can't handle properly<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/flutter/improving-flutter-with-your-opinion-q4-2019-survey-results-ba0e6721bf23<|eol|><|sor|><|eor|><|sor|>>
<|eor|><|sor|>
<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | legalize_goto | btvxw9 | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 155 |
programmingcirclejerk | three18ti | ep3g6wu | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 115 |
programmingcirclejerk | myhf | ep3y65i | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>But really, fuck Oracle.
/uj But really, if you're too stupid to use their product when it brings nothing to the table but marketing value and massive, obscene bloat (I once helped our DBA in my Enterpreis Jabba gig to install Oracle Database on a couple of RHEL boxes for a small cluster, it's insane the amount of shit that comes with that POS product), the joke's on you.
Needless to say that Enterpries system migrated to Postgres couple of years after I left. They've grown so tired of everything regarding that fucking company and their product that they invested serious money to be rid of it.<|eor|><|sor|>Q: Why don't Oracle products use software license keys?
A: So Oracle can sue their own customers for accidentally using more products than they paid for.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 38 |
programmingcirclejerk | ejpusa | ep4wpmh | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>Had a friend that did sales in NYS for Oracle.
As he said, We got NYS by the balls. They cant do a damn thing. We raise the prices constantly. And we just squeeze. Not a damn thing they can do about it. <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 24 |
programmingcirclejerk | Jonno_FTW | ep4uhxx | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>DEATH TO ORACLE
SELECT * FROM UNJERK
DEATH TO ORACLE<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 24 |
programmingcirclejerk | lazic_ | ep466lu | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>I'll never be fired for choosing Oracle database. In the same time, money dips into my crocodile leather wallet. Damn it feels good to be an enterprise software developer.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 23 |
programmingcirclejerk | secwiz1 | ep3kk6z | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>What's up, my gangsta's?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | three18ti | ep5d9c1 | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>I hate Oracle and Java too, but isn't Oracle DB faster than PostGres and able to handle greater volumes?<|eor|><|sor|>/uj
I am not a DBA so I really couldn't answer. It was just my job to "make the server work".
I know OracleDB is hugely popular in large enterprises, but no one has been able to answer me why. It's mostly "well the business bought it long before my time and we just can't be arsed to rewrite the application even though it would be MASSIVELY cheaper to run every year, but that's seen as CapEx and the OpEx required to rewrite it (while only being a fraction of the CapEx for one year) is 'too much'".
(Also, shouldn't software licensing be OpEx?...)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | spookthesunset | ep69by3 | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>I hate Oracle and Java too, but isn't Oracle DB faster than PostGres and able to handle greater volumes?<|eor|><|sor|>Security consultant here. Oracle lacks genetics, which are in my experience a huge source of security issues. By not having generics or other needless abstractions Oracle is much more secure than less advanced databases.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | three18ti | ep3p1vr | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>But really, fuck Oracle.
/uj But really, if you're too stupid to use their product when it brings nothing to the table but marketing value and massive, obscene bloat (I once helped our DBA in my Enterpreis Jabba gig to install Oracle Database on a couple of RHEL boxes for a small cluster, it's insane the amount of shit that comes with that POS product), the joke's on you.
Needless to say that Enterpries system migrated to Postgres couple of years after I left. They've grown so tired of everything regarding that fucking company and their product that they invested serious money to be rid of it.<|eor|><|sor|>I think the only thing I hate more than RAC is AEM... Actually... I think I hate RAC more.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | Durahk | ep61o14 | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>> PgSQL Life ridas
Elephant boiiiiiiiiiiis <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 10 |
programmingcirclejerk | Freyr90 | ep3u8sn | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>Yeah, but was anybody fired for choosing oracle?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 8 |
programmingcirclejerk | three18ti | ep5c84m | <|sols|><|sot|>During interviews I ask what they use for the database. If they say Oracle I laugh and say "you made a huge mistake" and run for the door.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/comments/btavnm/comment/eox7ior<|eol|><|sor|>this but unironcially.
/uj Seriously, if I never have to have another call at 03:00 because the RAC cluster failed again it will be too soon.
/rj fuck Java, fuck RAC, fuck Oracle as a company, software, and way to do business. And if you want to be down with Oracle then fuck you too! You motherfuckers can't be us or see us. We motherfuckin' PgSQL Life ridas. Fuck 'em, we Oracle killas!<|eor|><|sor|>but postgres doesn't have any answer to RAC. You could have also run your oracle systems without the cluster redundancy and not had to deal with the extra rac ping network or any of the other stuff that you guys probably did wrong<|eor|><|sor|>Lolimplicitunjerk.
/uj first of all, this was a solution sold to executives based on perceived_ needs, not actual application requirements. Second of all this was a solution installed BY ORACLE [consultants] who "specialized" in RAC. Finally, the resiliency was about the only feature we _actually_ needed and consistently didn't work.
So no, it wasn't something _we_ the sysadmins did wrong. But good detective skills ya got there. Hope you get a call about RAC at 03:00.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 8 |
programmingcirclejerk | Perceptes | bsd0ac | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 153 |
programmingcirclejerk | haskell_leghumper | eolt0iq | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 110 |
programmingcirclejerk | Waghlon | eom2wvc | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Hashtag unjerk: If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
​
Hashtag rejerk: Time to rewrite Rust in Rust<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 89 |
programmingcirclejerk | crochet_du_gauche | eolv35p | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 87 |
programmingcirclejerk | plasticparakeet | eomk78a | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Hashtag unjerk: If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
​
Hashtag rejerk: Time to rewrite Rust in Rust<|eor|><|sor|>>If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
Compiling things by yourself is a thrilling experience. The aesthetics of the compiler output scrolling in the background, combined with the right retrowave YouTube playlist makes you feel like a hacker from 80s.
Not to mention that with those scary software and hardware vulnerabilities surfacing every day, binary blobs from the Internet are very dangerous, but millions of lines of source code that you'll never touch are not.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 72 |
programmingcirclejerk | CornedBee | eom7gz1 | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 56 |
programmingcirclejerk | PM_ME_YOUR_PAULDRONS | eomgy4a | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|sor|>Imagine trusting the makers of an fpga<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 51 |
programmingcirclejerk | TheAceOfHearts | eom964u | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Relevant: [Reflections on trusting trust](https://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf). It's all turtles, all the way down. Also, this won't help you if your hardware is full of back-doors. Your only hope is to bury everything 1000 miles underground and hope that the hackers don't figure out how to send cosmic radiation to rewrite your code.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 40 |
programmingcirclejerk | MyNameIsErr | eomw9la | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Hashtag unjerk: If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
​
Hashtag rejerk: Time to rewrite Rust in Rust<|eor|><|sor|>>If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
Compiling things by yourself is a thrilling experience. The aesthetics of the compiler output scrolling in the background, combined with the right retrowave YouTube playlist makes you feel like a hacker from 80s.
Not to mention that with those scary software and hardware vulnerabilities surfacing every day, binary blobs from the Internet are very dangerous, but millions of lines of source code that you'll never touch are not.<|eor|><|sor|>I use Gentoo btw<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 36 |
programmingcirclejerk | hedgehog1024 | eomsaj0 | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|sor|>Imagine trusting the makers of an fpga<|eor|><|sor|>The only true way is to make your own "processors" out of logic gates made of nothing but transistors.
DIY transistors, of course.<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting others' silicon<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 36 |
programmingcirclejerk | Canenald | eomc57z | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 35 |
programmingcirclejerk | pcjftw | eom9st6 | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Relevant: [Reflections on trusting trust](https://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf). It's all turtles, all the way down. Also, this won't help you if your hardware is full of back-doors. Your only hope is to bury everything 1000 miles underground and hope that the hackers don't figure out how to send cosmic radiation to rewrite your code.<|eor|><|sor|>Too late bruh there is already an Emacs short cut:
C-x M-x M-cosmic-radiation<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 31 |
programmingcirclejerk | jeremyjh | eomut73 | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|sor|>Imagine trusting the makers of an fpga<|eor|><|sor|>The only true way is to make your own "processors" out of logic gates made of nothing but transistors.
DIY transistors, of course.<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting others' silicon<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting other people's silicon mining equipment.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 30 |
programmingcirclejerk | andiconda | eon3yg5 | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|sor|>Imagine trusting the makers of an fpga<|eor|><|sor|>The only true way is to make your own "processors" out of logic gates made of nothing but transistors.
DIY transistors, of course.<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting others' silicon<|eor|><|sor|>Just create a whole fucking universe of your own tuned just so that your electronic devices just happen to occur in the wild just like gold deposits.<|eor|><|sor|>I hear kubernetes is adding that feature soon.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 26 |
programmingcirclejerk | hedgehog1024 | eon58gv | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|sor|>Imagine trusting the makers of an fpga<|eor|><|sor|>The only true way is to make your own "processors" out of logic gates made of nothing but transistors.
DIY transistors, of course.<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting others' silicon<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting other people's silicon mining equipment.<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting your own hands<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 24 |
programmingcirclejerk | playsiderightside | eon0fh0 | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Hashtag unjerk: If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
​
Hashtag rejerk: Time to rewrite Rust in Rust<|eor|><|sor|>>If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
Compiling things by yourself is a thrilling experience. The aesthetics of the compiler output scrolling in the background, combined with the right retrowave YouTube playlist makes you feel like a hacker from 80s.
Not to mention that with those scary software and hardware vulnerabilities surfacing every day, binary blobs from the Internet are very dangerous, but millions of lines of source code that you'll never touch are not.<|eor|><|sor|>I use Gentoo btw<|eor|><|sor|>Me too and I'll gladly recompile the whole rust toolchain for that 0.1% performance increase just so that I can know that my rust is running for MY hardware. Gotta go as fast as you possibly can go!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 23 |
programmingcirclejerk | basyt | eomuzko | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Also, OCaml is written in OCaml, so if you want to compile OCaml from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in C, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>Also, C is written in C, so if you want to compile C from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in PDP-11 assembler, and then compiling a bunch of intermediate compiler versions using the previously-compiled version to inch your way towards the current version.<|eor|><|sor|>semi-unjerk: I think hand-translating a simple C compiler to machine code might be faster.
And yes, machine code. Why would you trust the assembler? Are you insane? Frankly, the fact that you use 3rd party hardware instead of building your own is a dangerous risk to take.<|eor|><|sor|>the only true way is burning your custom dataflow computing compiler onto an FPGA and using that to compile a compiler you can trust<|eor|><|sor|>Imagine trusting the makers of an fpga<|eor|><|sor|>The only true way is to make your own "processors" out of logic gates made of nothing but transistors.
DIY transistors, of course.<|eor|><|sor|>lol trusting others' silicon<|eor|><|sor|>Just create a whole fucking universe of your own tuned just so that your electronic devices just happen to occur in the wild just like gold deposits.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 23 |
programmingcirclejerk | VeganVagiVore | eon454h | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>/uj
Someone is working on this https://github.com/thepowersgang/mrustc
This is a Rust compiler with no borrow checker that's implemented in C++, with the explicit goal of being able to bootstrap the newest Rust from C++ tools.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 22 |
programmingcirclejerk | unfixpoint | eon18go | <|sols|><|sot|>Don't forget, Rust is written in Rust, so if you want to compile Rust from source because you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, you're in for a very long and arduous journey all the way back to the last version of the compiler written in OCaml<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19998412<|eol|><|sor|>Hashtag unjerk: If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
​
Hashtag rejerk: Time to rewrite Rust in Rust<|eor|><|sor|>>If you don't trust the precompiled toolchain, why the hell are you using the language in the first place?
Compiling things by yourself is a thrilling experience. The aesthetics of the compiler output scrolling in the background, combined with the right retrowave YouTube playlist makes you feel like a hacker from 80s.
Not to mention that with those scary software and hardware vulnerabilities surfacing every day, binary blobs from the Internet are very dangerous, but millions of lines of source code that you'll never touch are not.<|eor|><|sor|>I use Gentoo btw<|eor|><|sor|>Me too and I'll gladly recompile the whole rust toolchain for that 0.1% performance increase just so that I can know that my rust is running for MY hardware. Gotta go as fast as you possibly can go!<|eor|><|sor|>Do you even `CFLAGS`!? I got like almost, about nearly 0.5% performance gain..<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 19 |
programmingcirclejerk | Veedrac | be97xf | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 156 |
programmingcirclejerk | loics2 | el4a7hf | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>>> Rather than argue about it, I'll just put my money where my mouth is and offer you $50 if you can find a bug in it.
> For one your program crashes if you give it two arguments.
Oof<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 190 |
programmingcirclejerk | Veedrac | el3xu7i | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|soopr|>Now people might look at my interpretation of `interpretH` here and think to themselves "what the fuck does any of that mean?" But the nice thing about Haskell is that nobody cares.<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 96 |
programmingcirclejerk | PM_UML_DIAGRAMS | el4g10z | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>>> Rather than argue about it, I'll just put my money where my mouth is and offer you $50 if you can find a bug in it.
> For one your program crashes if you give it two arguments.
Oof<|eor|><|sor|>10/10 dude definitely did not pay up<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 79 |
programmingcirclejerk | tpgreyknight | el41ftz | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>> You can also prove code to be mathematically correct while it still has bugs; you can just misunderstand the requirement and prove that misunderstood requirement. Nothing automated will help against that.
Dammit somebody already delivered my snark.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 65 |
programmingcirclejerk | quicknir | el4k9tu | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>>> Rather than argue about it, I'll just put my money where my mouth is and offer you $50 if you can find a bug in it.
> For one your program crashes if you give it two arguments.
Oof<|eor|><|sor|>> Pretends to be a mathematician
> Falls back instantly to empirical arguments when called on his bullshit<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 60 |
programmingcirclejerk | Axelay998 | el4wl6q | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>Wait I thought the Haskell community was just a meme, they actually exist holy shit<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 52 |
programmingcirclejerk | wubscale | el3ziqr | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>> Which means for the program whose type is ` x. x -> x`, there is exactly one program which has this type signature
And his name?
f :: a -> a
f _ = unsafeCoerce 0<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 46 |
programmingcirclejerk | defunkydrummer | el4qty7 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>> No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it
I **knew** it was going to be a Hasklar, even before opening the URL.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 38 |
programmingcirclejerk | DoctorAcula_42 | el4oh06 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>Show me a programmer who produces no bugs and I'll show you a power outage.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 37 |
programmingcirclejerk | spookthesunset | el5m045 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>>> Rather than argue about it, I'll just put my money where my mouth is and offer you $50 if you can find a bug in it.
> For one your program crashes if you give it two arguments.
Oof<|eor|><|sor|>Why would anybody would want to accept legacy fiat when they can accept Satoshis gift that is Bitcoin? A single bitcoin started at ZERO dollars and is now worth thousands. That is more growth than any other investment on the planet. On average it has done nothing but go up.
What Im saying is, forget Rust or Go. Satoshis blockchain will replace them all as the premier cloud development environment. Code is law.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 31 |
programmingcirclejerk | git_commit_-m_sudoku | el4wrl9 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>Wait I thought the Haskell community was just a meme, they actually exist holy shit<|eor|><|sor|>There are dozens of us! Dozens!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 29 |
programmingcirclejerk | 2bdb2 | el502zm | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>This is the type of idiot that even other idiots laugh at.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 26 |
programmingcirclejerk | 15rthughes | el5dp52 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>>> Rather than argue about it, I'll just put my money where my mouth is and offer you $50 if you can find a bug in it.
> For one your program crashes if you give it two arguments.
Oof<|eor|><|sor|>So hard rn<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 20 |
programmingcirclejerk | lgastako | el4vwp2 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>> Which means for the program whose type is ` x. x -> x`, there is exactly one program which has this type signature
And his name?
f :: a -> a
f _ = unsafeCoerce 0<|eor|><|sor|>And his fraternal twin:
g :: a -> a
g = g<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 20 |
programmingcirclejerk | quicknir | el5tr54 | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>Wait I thought the Haskell community was just a meme, they actually exist holy shit<|eor|><|sor|>There are dozens of us! Dozens!<|eor|><|sor|>And they earn hundreds of dollars! Hundreds!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
programmingcirclejerk | softball753 | el63a1f | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>>> Rather than argue about it, I'll just put my money where my mouth is and offer you $50 if you can find a bug in it.
> For one your program crashes if you give it two arguments.
Oof<|eor|><|sor|>Thats obviously *user error*!! The program works *perfectly* when sent sensible information.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 14 |
programmingcirclejerk | tpgreyknight | el6aj5y | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>Wait I thought the Haskell community was just a meme, they actually exist holy shit<|eor|><|sor|>There are dozens of us! Dozens!<|eor|><|sor|>And they earn hundreds of dollars! Hundreds!<|eor|><|sor|>(collectively)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | save_vs_death | el6nmpf | <|sols|><|sot|>No, I wasn't just exagerating. While plenty of code might have bugs, mine doesn't, and naturality proves it.<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/bdx64p/is_haskell_considered_the_one_language_to_rule/el3i4u1/<|eol|><|sor|>Show me a programmer who produces no bugs and I'll show you a power outage.<|eor|><|sor|>Speak for yourself, I draw arrows and diagram / pseudocode half of my shit in a notebook. I could pump out bugs with nothing bug a stick and sand.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 9 |
programmingcirclejerk | statistmonad | 9b0a0k | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 153 |
programmingcirclejerk | FireHellion | e4zdobs | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>lol generics<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 122 |
programmingcirclejerk | haskell_leghumper | e4zfn2u | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>lol generics<|eor|><|sor|>lol no more "lol no generics"<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 84 |
programmingcirclejerk | statistmonad | e4zfpvn | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>lol generics<|eor|><|sor|>lol no more "lol no generics"<|eor|><|soopr|>This is the real tragedy<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 71 |
programmingcirclejerk | hedgehog1024 | e4zdwak | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>> Polymorphism in Go should be implementable both at compile time (by repeated specialized compilation, as in C++) and at run time, so that the decision about implementation strategy can be left as a decision for the compiler and treated like any other compiler optimization.
Confirmed: Go compiler outsmarts gophers.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 60 |
programmingcirclejerk | ProfessorSexyTime | e4zeijq | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>> To scale Go to large code bases and developer efforts, it is important that code reuse work well
Copy-pasting isn't enough, apparently. <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 47 |
programmingcirclejerk | TheFearsomeEsquilax | e4zhoyo | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>lol generics<|eor|><|sor|>lol no more "lol no generics"<|eor|><|soopr|>This is the real tragedy<|eoopr|><|sor|>First the mascot, now generics. It's like the Go dev team is trying to get me to abstain from jerking.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 44 |
programmingcirclejerk | TheFearsomeEsquilax | e4zip49 | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>lol generics<|eor|><|sor|>will someone explain like i'm a gopher what a generic is? i'm just a simple log10x programmer, i'm worried i might need to become a log20x or log30x programmer if i want to keep working with go.,<|eor|><|sor|>It's a type that can represent a number of other types depending on the context in which it's used. Imagine if the simple letter "A" was not just the letter A, but could signify the letters B, C, D, E, F, G, and the words "gopher" and "gumball" and "sociology" and "shoulders" and many others too, depending on how someone decided to use it! This is the madness that so-called parametric polymorphism inflicts upon its users! What does a function like
func add(g G)
mean if G is a generic type? Why, it could mean anything, depending on what G is! How would anyone ever be able to understand what a simple line of code meant? It would be impossible! Introducing generics into a language is equivalent to anarchy being loosed upon the world! <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 42 |
programmingcirclejerk | haskell_leghumper | e4zeze3 | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>> To scale Go to large code bases and developer efforts, it is important that code reuse work well
Copy-pasting isn't enough, apparently. <|eor|><|sor|>How will the hundreds of thousands of gophers we hired understand our codebase, though? All it takes is one smartass to drop a `type T` somewhere and bam, the code is too complex for anyone to maintain.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 40 |
programmingcirclejerk | i9srpeg | e4zjx4x | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>for real though i don't get why they're using contracts to enforce generic bounds instead of just reusing interfaces. <|eor|><|sor|>Because that would make generics exactly the same as in other languages, and they wouldn't be able to push the narrative that they spent 9 years looking for the perfect solution to a problem that totally wasn't solved in the 70s-80s.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 34 |
programmingcirclejerk | TheFearsomeEsquilax | e4zllqn | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>#DEATH TO THE PCJ "LOL NO GENERICS MEME"!!!
#DEATH TO THE PCJ "LOL NO GENERICS MEME"!!!
#DEATH TO THE PCJ "LOL NO GENERICS MEME"!!!<|eor|><|sor|>That's the real reason they're introducing this feature. Rob Pike can't stand such toxic anti-Gopher memes anymore. He cried the last time he visited /r/pcj.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 33 |
programmingcirclejerk | welpfuckit | e4zxajv | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>lol generics<|eor|><|sor|>will someone explain like i'm a gopher what a generic is? i'm just a simple log10x programmer, i'm worried i might need to become a log20x or log30x programmer if i want to keep working with go.,<|eor|><|sor|>It's a type that can represent a number of other types depending on the context in which it's used. Imagine if the simple letter "A" was not just the letter A, but could signify the letters B, C, D, E, F, G, and the words "gopher" and "gumball" and "sociology" and "shoulders" and many others too, depending on how someone decided to use it! This is the madness that so-called parametric polymorphism inflicts upon its users! What does a function like
func add(g G)
mean if G is a generic type? Why, it could mean anything, depending on what G is! How would anyone ever be able to understand what a simple line of code meant? It would be impossible! Introducing generics into a language is equivalent to anarchy being loosed upon the world! <|eor|><|sor|>wait this is going to put me out of a job, i was hired to implement sort for every type in go<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 32 |
programmingcirclejerk | haskell_leghumper | e4zej88 | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>> Polymorphism in Go should be implementable both at compile time (by repeated specialized compilation, as in C++) and at run time, so that the decision about implementation strategy can be left as a decision for the compiler and treated like any other compiler optimization.
Confirmed: Go compiler outsmarts gophers.<|eor|><|sor|>In fact, Go interfaces are just sum types, at run time.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 31 |
programmingcirclejerk | ProfessorSexyTime | e4zgupu | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>> To scale Go to large code bases and developer efforts, it is important that code reuse work well
Copy-pasting isn't enough, apparently. <|eor|><|sor|>How will the hundreds of thousands of gophers we hired understand our codebase, though? All it takes is one smartass to drop a `type T` somewhere and bam, the code is too complex for anyone to maintain.<|eor|><|sor|>Sounds like you hired too many Googlers, not researchers, fairly young, fresh out of school, who learned Java, C, C++, and Python, and maybe some C#.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 30 |
programmingcirclejerk | TheFearsomeEsquilax | e4zevz5 | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>> The overall goal of the Go 2 effort is to address the most significant ways that Go fails to scale to large code bases and large developer efforts.
What is this nonsense? Has Russ Cox ever even programmed in Go? It scales better than any other language ever designed! Why is he even thinking of adding generics to the language? He'll ruin its much vaunted simplicity! <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 29 |
programmingcirclejerk | Someguy2020 | e4zwoq9 | <|sols|><|sot|>GENERICS<|eot|><|sol|>https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-generics-overview.md<|eol|><|sor|>can't wait for gophers badgering that they wanted generics all along<|eor|><|sor|>/jerk
The best part of todays jerk fest is that all of a sudden all the arguments people made against go's misfeatures and lack of features are suddenly totally valid and reasons to make sweeping language changes.
fucking amazing. <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 29 |
programmingcirclejerk | ssyrek | 7lj1na | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 155 |
programmingcirclejerk | 0987654231 | drmsor9 | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>honestly without static types any non-trivial refactor is stupidly and pointlessly difficult<|eor|><|sor|>what are you 80? no one refactors anything anymore we just rewrite the microservice.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 92 |
programmingcirclejerk | dalastboss | drmqqt8 | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>honestly without static types any non-trivial refactor is stupidly and pointlessly difficult<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 74 |
programmingcirclejerk | 0987654231 | drmmcrh | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>What did I just read.<|eor|><|sor|>an article saying types are bad and it's ok to just crash the app instead if you miss an error.
Oh yeah and just write unit tests for everything cause that's easier than static typing.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 67 |
programmingcirclejerk | lasfter | drmnqvy | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>Static typing is bad because it requires us to follow a bunch of rules to satisfy a compiler, which makes it difficult to express many common programs.
The solution is to stick with a dynamic language but follow a bunch of rules at places where you can tell there might be errors and type issues (with your human eye which is much smarter/more accurate than a computer's). This way if something goes wrong all that can happen is:
* Your function returns its argument (which is not a type you expected) unchanged
* Your function removes a bunch of elements from the array it was passed because it doesn't like their type
* Your function ignores its argument (because its argument is undefined) and uses a default
* Your function throws because you forgot to follow all your conventions which are never checked by anyone at some point
None of these are problems though, because you didn't have to deal with your compiler telling you things like "you're passing undefined to this function", "this argument is nullable but you're treating it as an integer", "your program is broken", etc.
Weeeeeew, lad.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 66 |
programmingcirclejerk | haskell_leghumper | drn760u | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>Same old Rich-Hickey-quoting wank about typed languages being too 'restrictive', while assuming TypeScript is the state of the art, and not having tried decent languages with REPLs or worked with monster codebases in untyped languages.
Restrictions are _good_. What you know a program _doesn't_ do is sometimes more valuable than what you know it does, _especially_ if you're dealing with something that wasn't written by you. People who claim otherwise have probably never had to refactor anything nontrivial or work with other people's code.
/jerk
lol sincere frustration on pcj<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 46 |
programmingcirclejerk | YourGamerMom | drmu070 | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>honestly without static types any non-trivial refactor is stupidly and pointlessly difficult<|eor|><|sor|>what are you 80? no one refactors anything anymore we just rewrite the microservice.<|eor|><|sor|>If you're truly 10x like me you'll just wait for a new framework to come out and just do a complete system rewrite.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 44 |
programmingcirclejerk | possibly_not_a_bot | drmlbvh | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>What did I just read.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 41 |
programmingcirclejerk | lasfter | drneckk | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>> However, because of the nature of compilers and code parsing, compilers often locate an error some distance from the code we have to change to fix it. An interpreter or a just-in-time compiler, by contrast, usually breaks closer to the issue.
var position = {x:0, y:0};
...
position.x += 1;
position += 2;
I'm sure this error will be caught sooner with dynamic typing.<|eor|><|sor|> > position += 2
"[object Object]2"
What error?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 39 |
programmingcirclejerk | ericmiller1976 | drn1ylj | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand LISP. The binding rules are extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of abstract syntax tree theory most of the macros will go over a Blub programmers head. Theres also Paul Grahams futuristic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from John McCarthy's literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of his essays, to realise that theyre not just insightful- they say something deep about COMPUTATION. As a consequence people who dislike LISP truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldnt appreciate, for instance, the humour in Paul Grahams current startup YCombinator which itself is a cryptic reference to itself. Im smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as John McCarthys genius wit unfolds itself on their Emacs windows. What fools.. how I pity them.
And yes, by the way, i DO have a LISP tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. Its for the ladies eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that theyre within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 35 |
programmingcirclejerk | r2d2_21 | drmnd8f | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>I too like bugs and hard to follow code<|eor|><|sor|>It keeps me awake, otherwise work would be boring.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 30 |
programmingcirclejerk | zzvapezz | drmzzol | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>DunningKrugerEffect(level = 88)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 27 |
programmingcirclejerk | shermanramni | drn6d83 | <|sols|><|sot|>I love Javascript and this whole static typing thing is truly harshing my mellow<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@supersgp/freedom-from-the-box-c229df788439<|eol|><|sor|>>While I think only zombie Freud can truly explain the programmer fetish forcorrectness, it is pretty easy to argue that putting the idea of perfection at the core of computing underlies some of our less-humane effects.
Sure, let's disregard that correctness thing. Who needs a program that does what's supposed to do.
Such 10X thinking. <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 27 |
programmingcirclejerk | Mat2012H | 6w8q6w | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 157 |
programmingcirclejerk | purely-dysfunctional | dm68860 | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>Youtube comments are too low effort. My jerk material needs to have class.<|eor|><|sor|>> needs to have class
> class
Fired.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 179 |
programmingcirclejerk | HurtlesIntoTurtles | dm671xg | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>Youtube comments are too low effort. My jerk material needs to have class.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 107 |
programmingcirclejerk | Facts_About_Cats | dm667th | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>He definitely sounds super confident about whatever it is that he could possibly be trying to mean.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 61 |
programmingcirclejerk | cant-masquerade | dm6fiaa | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>template <class unjerk>
void unjerkify(unjerky u)
I've eventually concluded these people are impossible to have a rational conversation with. They will hide behind efficiency, explicitness, anything they can, to somehow argue that dozens of lines involving malloc, conditionals, and pointer arithmetic is better than just creating a `vector` and calling `push_back`.
Sadly these people are rarely actually good technically, because people who are good technically will actually look at their assembly, and realize that very often C++ assembly is the same, or even better, and understand what to use when. The people that sweepingly say that C is faster than C++ are hopeless.<|eor|><|sor|>It's retarded for sure. I like C far more, but type safety is obviously more efficient than memory addressing through void.
And templates/RAII are the main reasons to use C++ at all, really. If you forgoe both of those that's like what the fuck are you doing.<|eor|><|sor|>> I like C far more
> type safety
> more efficient than memory addressing through void
> templates
> RAII
I'm sorry, have you heard about our lord and savior Rust? Featuring type inference, pattern matching, guaranteed memory safety, trait-based generics and efficient C bindings (not to mention zero-cost abstractions and fearless concurrency)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 52 |
programmingcirclejerk | quicknir | dm68rxz | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>template <class unjerk>
void unjerkify(unjerky u)
I've eventually concluded these people are impossible to have a rational conversation with. They will hide behind efficiency, explicitness, anything they can, to somehow argue that dozens of lines involving malloc, conditionals, and pointer arithmetic is better than just creating a `vector` and calling `push_back`.
Sadly these people are rarely actually good technically, because people who are good technically will actually look at their assembly, and realize that very often C++ assembly is the same, or even better, and understand what to use when. The people that sweepingly say that C is faster than C++ are hopeless.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 46 |
programmingcirclejerk | thephotoman | dm674z9 | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>But why are they using C++ for that? If you want to write in C, just do it. Most C++ compilers have a C frontend as well.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | HurtlesIntoTurtles | dm6e6ln | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>But why are they using C++ for that? If you want to write in C, just do it. Most C++ compilers have a C frontend as well.<|eor|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>/preachingjerk
Yup, there's a clearly established reason why C isn't really relevant at all (save for legacy libraries like stb image, ffmpeg, et al) in userspace: it's good for one fucking thing, and that's iterating through bytes and writing directly to them.
It's high level enough to where it isn't considered retarded to implement a task scheduler in today's world, but so low level where the concept of "type" is a very real illusion.
With C++ you obviously can go that route, but why would you: you can still benefit from having direct control over memory while building abstractions however you really want to.
But for a kernel, driver, or firmware...C++ is probably a very terrible choice. Probably. There are exceptions, but most of the time you should let C do what it's still good for, and that's working as a real portable assembler.
C++ is what you use when the user interacts directly with the application. C is what talks to the machines.<|eor|><|sor|>Hi.
Have you tried Rust?
/uj
> But for a kernel, driver, or firmware...C++ is probably a very terrible choice. Probably. There are exceptions, but most of the time you should let C do what it's still good for, and that's working as a real portable assembler.
You don't use C, you apply C idioms in C++ where required. That's the entire point of the existence of that language. When you iterate through bytes and write directly to them, you write code for iterating through bytes and writing directly to them, and not anywhere else. But even then, [C++ might be the better choice](https://github.com/kvasir-io/Kvasir/wiki).<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 17 |
programmingcirclejerk | PlasmaSheep | dm6m3ad | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>tfw you std::make_unique everything and haven't used new or delete in years<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
programmingcirclejerk | KindaAgrees | dm6p68w | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>tfw you std::make_unique everything and haven't used new or delete in years<|eor|><|sor|> #[derive(RESF)]
Try Rust! With move semantics (and distinction between readonly references and read-write (mutable) references), you effectively get all the benefits of unique_ptr (and then some more) built right into the language (and not stdlib), with pretty much no risk of accidentally using the unsafe pointers!
I'm openly shilling right now, but seriously, Rust aims first and foremost at solving this exact problem of C/C++ pointers being hard to use correctly, and easy to shoot yourself in the foot with.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
programmingcirclejerk | KindaAgrees | dm6q2eb | <|sols|><|sot|>Templates? Fired. 'OOP' (that's still a thing?)? Fired. new/delete? Fired. RAII? Fired. Excessive operator overloading? Fired.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/r8Y3tGN.png<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>tfw you std::make_unique everything and haven't used new or delete in years<|eor|><|sor|> #[derive(RESF)]
Try Rust! With move semantics (and distinction between readonly references and read-write (mutable) references), you effectively get all the benefits of unique_ptr (and then some more) built right into the language (and not stdlib), with pretty much no risk of accidentally using the unsafe pointers!
I'm openly shilling right now, but seriously, Rust aims first and foremost at solving this exact problem of C/C++ pointers being hard to use correctly, and easy to shoot yourself in the foot with.<|eor|><|sor|>UJ: what is this RESF thing you're deriving here?<|eor|><|sor|>[Rust Evangelism Strike Force](https://archive.is/A0stm/c4ea72da36c8d8504d44e802af947485ae37d33a.png)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.