subreddit stringclasses 7
values | author stringlengths 3 20 | id stringlengths 5 7 | content stringlengths 67 30.4k | score int64 0 140k |
|---|---|---|---|---|
programmingcirclejerk | UnheardIdentity | jgva756 | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Crazy people rule.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 38 |
programmingcirclejerk | exploooooosions | jgwm59y | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Respectfully request user flair: `Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Stallman`<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 38 |
programmingcirclejerk | JavaSux0 | jguzu8b | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Clearly the accurate representation of Stallman's work is as professional PCJerker.<|eor|><|sor|>Don't forget toejam muncher<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 28 |
programmingcirclejerk | annoyed_freelancer | jgvfnzp | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Clearly the accurate representation of Stallman's work is as professional PCJerker.<|eor|><|sor|>Don't forget toejam muncher<|eor|><|sor|>It'll always be too soon to be reminded of that.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 24 |
programmingcirclejerk | sqlphilosopher | jgvda2c | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>>I am not an entertainer, except for a few minutes when I don the robe and halo of Saint iGNUcius<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 22 |
programmingcirclejerk | jalembung | jgwu61e | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>nah, can't jerk. even though he's a man, according to many, with less than ideal personal hygiene and who's at the extremity of a certain spectrum, you can't discount the work he put into gnu project. i don't think i need to remind you that building up a momentum is much harder than riding on a coat tail like a man child that is esr.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 22 |
programmingcirclejerk | Erelde | jh0q564 | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Linking to stallman.org is cheating<|eor|><|sor|>Enthusiastic Youngsters rule.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | RidderHaddock | jgwex4n | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Clearly the accurate representation of Stallman's work is as professional PCJerker.<|eor|><|sor|>Don't forget toejam muncher<|eor|><|sor|>It'll always be too soon to be reminded of that.<|eor|><|sor|>Wut? Context pls<|eor|><|sor|>You really don't wanna know.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | iamnearlysmart | jgwj6fw | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Clearly the accurate representation of Stallman's work is as professional PCJerker.<|eor|><|sor|>Don't forget toejam muncher<|eor|><|sor|>It'll always be too soon to be reminded of that.<|eor|><|sor|>Wut? Context pls<|eor|><|sor|>Oh you sweet summer child. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ<|eor|><|sor|>I dont know what I expected.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | annoyed_freelancer | jgwfa7z | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Clearly the accurate representation of Stallman's work is as professional PCJerker.<|eor|><|sor|>Don't forget toejam muncher<|eor|><|sor|>It'll always be too soon to be reminded of that.<|eor|><|sor|>Wut? Context pls<|eor|><|sor|>Oh you sweet summer child. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | iMacmatician | jgwzm8z | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>>Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Stallman<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | elmosworld37 | jgxz3d0 | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>They gave him free doctorates in exchange for free software. Sounds like a quid-pro-quo, and very un-free indeed.
Personally, the moment I realized that PhD meant doctorate in philosophy, it completely turned me off the idea. Im not in software for pondering the meaning of things, Im in it for delivering user value at any cost. Why cant I just `go get https://github.com/mit/UvD` (user value doctorate)? The barrier to entry really shows that universities arent concerned with delivering user value either.<|eor|><|sor|>> doctorate in philosophy
or as i've taken to calling it, doctorate plus philosophy<|eor|><|sor|>/uj I fucking love that this implies that its mainstream to call PhDs philosophy
/rj D/Ph<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | Laugarhraun | jgvez4k | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Saying "open source and free software are the same thing" is a PM-level take. I expect better from my engineer peers.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 11 |
programmingcirclejerk | gvozden_celik | jgzeide | <|sols|><|sot|>The article is not error-free. For instance, it calls me an "open-source software pioneer," which misrepresents my views and my work.<|eot|><|sol|>https://stallman.org/articles/dr-stallman.html<|eol|><|sor|>Respectfully request user flair: `Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Stallman`<|eor|><|sor|>I am 87% convinced that he has an Emac's macro for typing that<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 9 |
programmingcirclejerk | Pensateur | 1260mv3 | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 140 |
programmingcirclejerk | Pensateur | je6wvfx | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|soopr|>Cant risk losing civilization [to this guy](https://preview.redd.it/xgoa4nvip1qa1.png?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=9d3c636e651928ef8c84a6018b73feb13735a4ce)<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 136 |
programmingcirclejerk | seaQueue | je7ecz5 | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Silicon Valley big-brains manage to be the most excited people about AI and simultaneously the most terrified of it.
(The common element is apparently a vastly inflated idea about what is possible or will be possible in the near future with AI.)<|eor|><|sor|>You'll notice that all of the corporate interests signing this letter or engaging in "but our society!" pearl clutching don't have competing LLM products. They want the industry to stop and wait for them to catch up so they get a slice of the LLM pie too.
You'll also note that most of these same "tech leaders" generally didn't give a fuck about the state of society until they weren't getting a slice of the pie.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 81 |
programmingcirclejerk | EnergeticBean | je7ksfk | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Let it happen and then bring on the butlerian jihad motherfuckers<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 77 |
programmingcirclejerk | Kodiologist | je78tdj | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Silicon Valley big-brains manage to be the most excited people about AI and simultaneously the most terrified of it.
(The common element is apparently a vastly inflated idea about what is possible or will be possible in the near future with AI.)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 72 |
programmingcirclejerk | skantanio | je78ka7 | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|soopr|>Cant risk losing civilization [to this guy](https://preview.redd.it/xgoa4nvip1qa1.png?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=9d3c636e651928ef8c84a6018b73feb13735a4ce)<|eoopr|><|sor|>What youre seeing is a simple Newtonian iterative solution for searching parameters in a thesaurus. It only found the word after 4 iterations! Impressive.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 72 |
programmingcirclejerk | Hueho | je7omou | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Silicon Valley big-brains manage to be the most excited people about AI and simultaneously the most terrified of it.
(The common element is apparently a vastly inflated idea about what is possible or will be possible in the near future with AI.)<|eor|><|sor|>You'll notice that all of the corporate interests signing this letter or engaging in "but our society!" pearl clutching don't have competing LLM products. They want the industry to stop and wait for them to catch up so they get a slice of the LLM pie too.
You'll also note that most of these same "tech leaders" generally didn't give a fuck about the state of society until they weren't getting a slice of the pie.<|eor|><|sor|>techbro when he got early on the last fad: "Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!"
techbro when he missed the boat: "Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck."<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 56 |
programmingcirclejerk | tomwhoiscontrary | je7z9xo | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>ChatGPT cant even code a multi class OOP application. It barely can remember the conversation you are having with it. I am not worried.<|eor|><|sor|>But i can't go that either.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 43 |
programmingcirclejerk | NoDadYouShutUp | je7suw8 | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>ChatGPT cant even code a multi class OOP application. It barely can remember the conversation you are having with it. I am not worried.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 40 |
programmingcirclejerk | suflaj | je6wqaq | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>We should not risk loss of control, we should ensure it<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 39 |
programmingcirclejerk | pareidolist | je8eedt | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Let it happen and then bring on the butlerian jihad motherfuckers<|eor|><|sor|>yo that basilisk thing is going to end your bloodline<|eor|><|sor|>roko deez nuts<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 37 |
programmingcirclejerk | duckbill_principate | je8dbx2 | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>>Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us?
Yes. Now fuck off back to the stone age, you troglodyte cowards.<|eor|><|sor|>lol should we build things smarter than us?
god damn I fucking hope so<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 34 |
programmingcirclejerk | yiliu | je8r4w7 | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>ChatGPT cant even code a multi class OOP application. It barely can remember the conversation you are having with it. I am not worried.<|eor|><|sor|>But i can't go that either.<|eor|><|sor|>Whew...guys, we're also safe from tomwhoiscontrary taking over our civilization!
That's two weights off of my mind!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 33 |
programmingcirclejerk | iFangy | je806oc | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Scribes when the printing press was invented:
> Contemporary AI systems are now becoming human-competitive at general tasks<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 31 |
programmingcirclejerk | VanillaSkyDreamer | je76ver | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|soopr|>Cant risk losing civilization [to this guy](https://preview.redd.it/xgoa4nvip1qa1.png?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=9d3c636e651928ef8c84a6018b73feb13735a4ce)<|eoopr|><|sor|>See he's already good at branzenly pushing a bunch of byllshit at you<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 30 |
programmingcirclejerk | duckbill_principate | je89vom | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Let it happen and then bring on the butlerian jihad motherfuckers<|eor|><|sor|>yo that basilisk thing is going to end your bloodline<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 28 |
programmingcirclejerk | AlexdDark | je7shgq | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>the machine god is here
all the whining is too late by far
harness the power or keep trembling<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 22 |
programmingcirclejerk | pandakekok9 | je9o2im | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>I unironically think AI development should be paused. Not because it's becoming too powerful or some ethics shit, it's just funny to have an AI winter again lol<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 19 |
programmingcirclejerk | Evinceo | je7tn1q | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>Silicon Valley big-brains manage to be the most excited people about AI and simultaneously the most terrified of it.
(The common element is apparently a vastly inflated idea about what is possible or will be possible in the near future with AI.)<|eor|><|sor|>The people publishing this are of course the Roko's Basilisk people (or at least Basilisk adjacent.)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 19 |
programmingcirclejerk | let_s_go_brand_c_uck | je7kwpd | <|sols|><|sot|>Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4<|eot|><|sol|>https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/<|eol|><|sor|>losers falling behind and calling on society to rein in the winners<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | wergot | zfr4cw | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 141 |
programmingcirclejerk | Gearwatcher | izddnii | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>What part of `MOV AX, [EBX + ESI]` do you not understand?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 114 |
programmingcirclejerk | relativetodatum | izdz1si | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>With C I can drop anywhere in a project and know what it does. Sure, sometimes its hard to know why code is modifying offsets through three layers of pointer indirection, but I know what the code is doing.
What does the program actually execute? I have no fucking clue. I feed it to the -O3 wood chipper and LTO it. But unlike other high level languages I see the allocations that may or may not happen, I see the control flow as it could potentially exist, I see the function calls that possibly occur, etc. Its just how the machine works.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 99 |
programmingcirclejerk | Philpax | izdcnpf | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>where's the lie<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 90 |
programmingcirclejerk | Kotauskas | izdezyc | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>```
Set-JerkingState -Context CommentWide -JerkingState Unjerked
```
Instinctively upvoted because I forgot what sub this is, corrected my mistake immediately after realizing<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 44 |
programmingcirclejerk | catlion | izdfihy | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>```
Set-JerkingState -Context CommentWide -JerkingState Unjerked
```
Instinctively upvoted because I forgot what sub this is, corrected my mistake immediately after realizing<|eor|><|sor|>Lol powershell<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 40 |
programmingcirclejerk | doctor-5000 | izermkr | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>Zero-cost abstractions are simple. Move semantics are simple. Guaranteed memory safety is simple. Threads without data races are simple. Trait-based generics are simple. Pattern matching is simple. Type inference is simple. Minimal runtime is simple. Efficient C bindings are simple.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 32 |
programmingcirclejerk | kebaabe | izekxi5 | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>a segfault is not a problem if you just auto reboot your machine<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 28 |
programmingcirclejerk | Laugarhraun | izfhvsw | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>With C I can drop anywhere in a project and know what it does. Sure, sometimes its hard to know why code is modifying offsets through three layers of pointer indirection, but I know what the code is doing.
What does the program actually execute? I have no fucking clue. I feed it to the -O3 wood chipper and LTO it. But unlike other high level languages I see the allocations that may or may not happen, I see the control flow as it could potentially exist, I see the function calls that possibly occur, etc. Its just how the machine works.<|eor|><|sor|>You forgot macros abuse.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 26 |
programmingcirclejerk | waadam | izgkuoa | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>What part of `MOV AX, [EBX + ESI]` do you not understand?<|eor|><|sor|>Why is your assembler yelling at me?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 25 |
programmingcirclejerk | dxpqxb | ize61wj | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>With C I can drop anywhere in a project and know what it does. Sure, sometimes its hard to know why code is modifying offsets through three layers of pointer indirection, but I know what the code is doing.
What does the program actually execute? I have no fucking clue. I feed it to the -O3 wood chipper and LTO it. But unlike other high level languages I see the allocations that may or may not happen, I see the control flow as it could potentially exist, I see the function calls that possibly occur, etc. Its just how the machine works.<|eor|><|sor|>That's not about the language anymore, you're talking about the tooling. And C community has developed amazing tooling, like how humanity has developed amazing techniques for avoiding dying from hunger before you twelfth birthday.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 24 |
programmingcirclejerk | RandallOfLegend | izeynmn | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>I like to check on my out of bounds memory just to make sure it behaves.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 21 |
programmingcirclejerk | MCRusher | izhnvdv | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>a segfault is not a problem if you just auto reboot your machine<|eor|><|sor|>virtual memory is dumb, just kill whatever currently owns the memory and take it.
Real programmers don't ask for permission.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 20 |
programmingcirclejerk | Gearwatcher | izi3yg9 | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>What part of `MOV AX, [EBX + ESI]` do you not understand?<|eor|><|sor|>Why is your assembler yelling at me?<|eor|><|sor|>It can detect 0.1xers by using deep learning on blockchain, duh, and then acts accordingly<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
programmingcirclejerk | ItsAllAboutTheL1Bro | izeokm6 | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>With C I can drop anywhere in a project and know what it does. Sure, sometimes its hard to know why code is modifying offsets through three layers of pointer indirection, but I know what the code is doing.
What does the program actually execute? I have no fucking clue. I feed it to the -O3 wood chipper and LTO it. But unlike other high level languages I see the allocations that may or may not happen, I see the control flow as it could potentially exist, I see the function calls that possibly occur, etc. Its just how the machine works.<|eor|><|sor|>That's not about the language anymore, you're talking about the tooling. And C community has developed amazing tooling, like how humanity has developed amazing techniques for avoiding dying from hunger before you twelfth birthday.<|eor|><|sor|>C is walking through the ghetto after 11 at night.
The tooling is your gat; glock users stick with GCC.
Diff and version all disassembly.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | Kotauskas | izeaaa1 | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>```
Set-JerkingState -Context CommentWide -JerkingState Unjerked
```
Instinctively upvoted because I forgot what sub this is, corrected my mistake immediately after realizing<|eor|><|sor|>Lol powershell<|eor|><|sor|>the command line if it was good<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | relativetodatum | izfjw0q | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>With C I can drop anywhere in a project and know what it does. Sure, sometimes its hard to know why code is modifying offsets through three layers of pointer indirection, but I know what the code is doing.
What does the program actually execute? I have no fucking clue. I feed it to the -O3 wood chipper and LTO it. But unlike other high level languages I see the allocations that may or may not happen, I see the control flow as it could potentially exist, I see the function calls that possibly occur, etc. Its just how the machine works.<|eor|><|sor|>You forgot macros abuse.<|eor|><|sor|>Macros are incredibly useful.
I develop [J](https://github.com/jsoftware/jsource) btw<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | Kotauskas | izfwzpc | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>```
Set-JerkingState -Context CommentWide -JerkingState Unjerked
```
Instinctively upvoted because I forgot what sub this is, corrected my mistake immediately after realizing<|eor|><|sor|>Lol powershell<|eor|><|sor|>the command line if it was good<|eor|><|sor|>you mean fish?<|eor|><|sor|>lol no native Windows support<|eor|><|sor|>M-my poor little fingies are too tired to type `wsl` <|eor|><|sor|>```
mov ecx, IA32_JERKSTATE
xor edx, edx
xor eax, eax
wrmsr
```
Why the fuck would I ever waste RAM on a Linux VM that has almost nothing running inside of it just to use a shell that thinks it's on a Unix-like system to actually run Windows programs on the Windows filesystem? If I wanted to do that, I'd just use Linux natively instead, or run it through Cygwin, which has vastly lower overhead, especially in terms of memory usage.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | vedyzal | izgszci | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>What part of `MOV AX, [EBX + ESI]` do you not understand?<|eor|><|sor|>virgin Intel vs chad AT&T syntax<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 11 |
programmingcirclejerk | MCRusher | izhnyqe | <|sols|><|sot|>C is the most dysfunctional non-esolang on the planet, precisely because everyone insisted on it being "just simple pointers"<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/zeyynm/c_overtakes_java_in_language_popularity_index/izbf5ze/<|eol|><|sor|>I like to check on my out of bounds memory just to make sure it behaves.<|eor|><|sor|>Gotta make sure to zero your entire address space at program start to deter hackers<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 11 |
programmingcirclejerk | WasserMarder | yemvg6 | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 137 |
programmingcirclejerk | ii-___-ii | ityuku9 | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Can someone translate his comment into Rust? Im having trouble interpreting it<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 150 |
programmingcirclejerk | irqlnotdispatchlevel | itz0dgw | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Can someone translate his comment into Rust? Im having trouble interpreting it<|eor|><|sor|>Rust is COMPILED, not interpreted like these other inferior languages.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 82 |
programmingcirclejerk | YqQbey | itytfw4 | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>That's also why smart contracts is a such good idea.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 78 |
programmingcirclejerk | snorc_snorc | itzgacb | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Rustacean truly is an evolved species far beyond mere mortal's comprehension abilities.
>>>> Also, purely on the technical side, treating the whole compiler as a specification would not be practical, as the compiler contains a lot of code that handles invalid source code and produces diagnostics. Having to dive through all of that to see how a part of the language behaves is impractical to say the least.
>>> Isn't this already solved by writing clean code with helpful encapsulating abstractions?
>> That's not how rustc is now, and I can guarantee you it's cheaper to write a spec that satisfies regulators than rewriting the whole compiler.
> And if it were, would that change your mind?
It's like explaining quantum physics to a cockroach. Who the cockroach is in the example is left as an exercise to the reader.<|eor|><|sor|>> Isn't this already solved by writing clean code with helpful encapsulating abstractions?
rusteceans arguing for "just write better code lol". we've come full circle.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 51 |
programmingcirclejerk | cheater00 | itzohia | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>That's also why smart contracts is a such good idea.<|eor|><|sor|>The DAO hack was as intended, because it was part of the original specification.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 47 |
programmingcirclejerk | Gearwatcher | itzajbv | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Rustacean truly is an evolved species far beyond mere mortal's comprehension abilities.
>>>> Also, purely on the technical side, treating the whole compiler as a specification would not be practical, as the compiler contains a lot of code that handles invalid source code and produces diagnostics. Having to dive through all of that to see how a part of the language behaves is impractical to say the least.
>>> Isn't this already solved by writing clean code with helpful encapsulating abstractions?
>> That's not how rustc is now, and I can guarantee you it's cheaper to write a spec that satisfies regulators than rewriting the whole compiler.
> And if it were, would that change your mind?
It's like explaining quantum physics to a cockroach. Who the cockroach is in the example is left as an exercise to the reader.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 44 |
programmingcirclejerk | LeeHide | ityun5w | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>The code is the documentation. Writing documentation is for people who are too incompetent to read code, and therefore a waste of time.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 40 |
programmingcirclejerk | pandakekok9 | itz40or | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Can someone translate his comment into Rust? Im having trouble interpreting it<|eor|><|sor|>Rust is COMPILED, not interpreted like these other inferior languages.<|eor|><|sor|>Hmm, but Rust compiles into an [interpreted language](https://github.com/rust-lang/miri). Has Rust lied to us? The morality!<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 34 |
programmingcirclejerk | BillyIII | ityxjle | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Rust spec in lojban when?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 33 |
programmingcirclejerk | path_traced_sphere | itzkijk | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Rust is so perfect it can only be described by itself, it is a true beauty to behold such a thing.
Maybe it harkens back to the question of whether mathematics is discovered or invented? What if Rust is some kind of language of the universe?
I posit that Rust is a primordial construction in our universe, and some may say I'm getting a bit speculative, but what if the Old Ones left Rust for us to find and enjoy?
Perhaps Rust is a key to a greater understanding? Perhaps it *is* the language of the Old Ones, whoever they may be. But Rust could be what all religions have been looking for all along?
I dunno, just my two cents.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 28 |
programmingcirclejerk | jwezorek | itz7ena | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>lol, the crab kids think they invented "this implementation is the spec."<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 27 |
programmingcirclejerk | Badel2 | iu0sal5 | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>> If the Rust specification is written in Rust, how does one make sense of the specification to begin with?
If the Rust compiler is written in Rust, how does one compile the compiler to begin with?<|eor|><|sor|>/uj This stuff legitimatly confuses me tho<|eor|><|sor|>You can use the Rust compiler today to write a program, and that program will be the Rust compiler tomorrow.
And how do you have a Rust compiler in the first place? Someone compiled it using yesterday's Rust compiler and you downloaded the executable. And how did they get yesterday's Rust compiler? They downloaded it from somewhere or compiled it themselves using the previous version, and this goes on and on until the first version that was written in Rust, which was compiled using the previous version of the Rust compiler that was written in OCaml, and therefore it used the OCaml compiler. And how did they make an OCaml compiler?
So if you follow this line of reasoning eventually you will find someone who wrote an assembler using ones and zeros. But this happens with all the software, not just the Rust compiler.<|eor|><|sor|>And how did they make a lisp interpreter?<|eor|><|sor|>Lisp is actually embedded in the fabric of the universe. In the 80s some programmers tried to extract this power by building lisp machines, but this angered God and he created all the different programming languages that we now use.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 25 |
programmingcirclejerk | UnheardIdentity | itzcnsd | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Rustacean truly is an evolved species far beyond mere mortal's comprehension abilities.
>>>> Also, purely on the technical side, treating the whole compiler as a specification would not be practical, as the compiler contains a lot of code that handles invalid source code and produces diagnostics. Having to dive through all of that to see how a part of the language behaves is impractical to say the least.
>>> Isn't this already solved by writing clean code with helpful encapsulating abstractions?
>> That's not how rustc is now, and I can guarantee you it's cheaper to write a spec that satisfies regulators than rewriting the whole compiler.
> And if it were, would that change your mind?
It's like explaining quantum physics to a cockroach. Who the cockroach is in the example is left as an exercise to the reader.<|eor|><|sor|>Me I'm the cockroach.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 19 |
programmingcirclejerk | jalembung | itz2y1w | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Can someone translate his comment into Rust? Im having trouble interpreting it<|eor|><|sor|>Rust is COMPILED, not interpreted like these other inferior languages.<|eor|><|sor|>well, to put simply, the binary is interpreted by operating system and then interpreted by processors.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | voidvector | iu2mcus | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Can someone translate his comment into Rust? Im having trouble interpreting it<|eor|><|sor|> let opt_jerkable: Option<Spec> = unsafe { english::from_hackernews() };
match opt_jerkable {
Some(jerkable) => println!("post {} to PCJ", jerkable);
None => panic!("unjerkable");
}
let jerkable: Spec = rust::from_perfect_jerk();
println!("post {} to PCJ", jerkable);<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | duckbill_principate | iu27gqu | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>That's also why smart contracts is a such good idea.<|eor|><|sor|>The DAO hack was as intended, because it was part of the original specification.<|eor|><|sor|>hard to believe in 2020 that so much revolutionary innovation could be squeezed from its
not a bug, its a feature<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | cheater00 | itzoz89 | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>> If the Rust specification is written in Rust, how does one make sense of the specification to begin with?
If the Rust compiler is written in Rust, how does one compile the compiler to begin with?<|eor|><|sor|>/uj This stuff legitimatly confuses me tho<|eor|><|sor|>/uj look up compiler bootstrapping, basically you roll a tiny implementation of your compiler in something that already exists (C, Perl, Haskell, PHP) and that spits out the binary you compile subsequent versions in. Before we had that we wrote compilers or assemblers in machine code.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 15 |
programmingcirclejerk | alecStewart1 | itzupex | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>> Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in.
Yea, man. That's why I'm a permanent work-from-home Rust hermit. (Get it? "Hermit" like a hermit crab?)
I went and got coffee at some local shop the other day and the cute busty barista behind the counter made a comment about my eye color and giggled. Was she making fun of my eye color? I dunno, man. Natural language in human interactions makes me anxious because it's unpredictable. With Rust, the compiler just tells me what I did and if I did something wrong outright. Why bother reading a spec?
That's why I also like dominant anime women, they just tell me what they want. Real women scare me, though. So you could say Rust is like a dominant anime woman.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 14 |
programmingcirclejerk | Badel2 | itzb7ex | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>> If the Rust specification is written in Rust, how does one make sense of the specification to begin with?
If the Rust compiler is written in Rust, how does one compile the compiler to begin with?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | CreedVI | itz0byp | <|sols|><|sot|>Natural languages leave space for misinterpretation. [...] With programming languages you get exactly what you coded in. Therefore, the Rust compiler's stabilised behaviour is the spec, and a more superior spec than if it were translated into English.<|eot|><|sol|>https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/ye94yc/do_we_need_a_rust_standard/itwws1h/<|eol|><|sor|>Rust spec in lojban when?<|eor|><|sor|>Set to release after the toki pona and solresol specs<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 13 |
programmingcirclejerk | Bizzaro_Murphy | vbwzkz | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 140 |
programmingcirclejerk | Bizzaro_Murphy | icattrz | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|soopr|>> [Yeah, "If I do <some obscure thing> in <chose any language>, and it doesn't work how I like, I don't think it's good"](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31735354)
Naming a file a of code and using a Mac. Both are notoriously obscure things to do.<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 118 |
programmingcirclejerk | KuntaStillSingle | icbsgz8 | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|soopr|>> [Yeah, "If I do <some obscure thing> in <chose any language>, and it doesn't work how I like, I don't think it's good"](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31735354)
Naming a file a of code and using a Mac. Both are notoriously obscure things to do.<|eoopr|><|sor|>The obscure thing is being a fan of the linux kernel specifically, it would be much less obscure to use a file name like i_love_gnu_plus_linux.go.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 59 |
programmingcirclejerk | VariationDistinct330 | icb46vc | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|sor|>> Sometimes I find it hard to read Go because I cant always tell at a glance what scope an identifier belongs to.
FROM THE READING PERSPECTIVE GO IS A HUGE WIN<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 51 |
programmingcirclejerk | VariationDistinct330 | icb27nh | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|soopr|>> [Yeah, "If I do <some obscure thing> in <chose any language>, and it doesn't work how I like, I don't think it's good"](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31735354)
Naming a file a of code and using a Mac. Both are notoriously obscure things to do.<|eoopr|><|sor|>Of course they are you silly GOOS<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 34 |
programmingcirclejerk | irqlnotdispatchlevel | icc59tt | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|sor|>Will i_love_commander_pike.go compile only on the Commander's laptop?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 31 |
programmingcirclejerk | pastenpasten | icdewth | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|soopr|>> [Yeah, "If I do <some obscure thing> in <chose any language>, and it doesn't work how I like, I don't think it's good"](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31735354)
Naming a file a of code and using a Mac. Both are notoriously obscure things to do.<|eoopr|><|sor|>The obscure thing is being a fan of the linux kernel specifically, it would be much less obscure to use a file name like i_love_gnu_plus_linux.go.<|eor|><|sor|>>The obscure thing is being a fan of the linux kernel specifically, it would be much less obscure to use a file name like i\_love\_gnu\_plus\_linux.go.
Obviously the kernel comes before the userland crap, so it's `i_love_linux_plus_gnu.go` which incidentally solves the issue.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 16 |
programmingcirclejerk | Bizzaro_Murphy | icccw8g | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|sor|>Will i_love_commander_pike.go compile only on the Commander's laptop?<|eor|><|soopr|>Yes because only the commander has the intelligence required to run PIKE OS.<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 12 |
programmingcirclejerk | MCRusher | icl4b1c | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|sor|>Go is a very sensible language that isnt nonsensical in the slightest. Very moral.<|eor|><|sor|>feel bad for pike, he accidentally submitted his esolang as a real language and now it has a huge following of masochists who hate themselves.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 10 |
programmingcirclejerk | First_Cardinal | icfhn46 | <|sols|><|sot|>if I name my source file i_love_linux.go, it wont get compiled on my Mac<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31734889<|eol|><|sor|>Go is a very sensible language that isnt nonsensical in the slightest. Very moral.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 7 |
programmingcirclejerk | RepresentativeNo6029 | sb2crz | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 139 |
programmingcirclejerk | juancarl0os | htx9lgf | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>Java was a good language until 1995.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 142 |
programmingcirclejerk | RepresentativeNo6029 | htxdpob | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|soopr|>C has no sum types after 70 years so I dont think anyone will even think about panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending. Go 1.2097 will have it. It will be optional only<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 68 |
programmingcirclejerk | plsnomoreovid | htxth23 | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|soopr|>C has no sum types after 70 years so I dont think anyone will even think about panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending. Go 1.2097 will have it. It will be optional only<|eoopr|><|sor|>C standard is the holy scripture that nobody dare change. Thou shalt not corrupt its teachings. Thou shalt not change it excepting that thou clarify that which remained unsaid.
Heretics caught infringing upon these commandments shall be burned on the stake as overseen by the HolyC.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 48 |
programmingcirclejerk | Poddster | hty73ao | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>I miss the days of casting everything to `(Object)` and back.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 45 |
programmingcirclejerk | omg-optimized | hty1v0w | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>>Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
-Rob "Commander" Pike<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 43 |
programmingcirclejerk | RepresentativeNo6029 | hty2o51 | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>>Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
-Rob "Commander" Pike<|eor|><|soopr|>Actually more like
> Those that fail to repeat history are doomed to learn from it.<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 38 |
programmingcirclejerk | _FedoraTipperBot_ | htyd6hi | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>I miss the days of casting everything to `(Object)` and back.<|eor|><|sor|>Under the hood I believe Java generics pretty much just do this automatically for you. I think this is sort of the reason why you can't do generics of non-boxed objects (e.g. ArrayList<int> will not compile but ArrayList<Integer> will).<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 28 |
programmingcirclejerk | degaart | htzee09 | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|soopr|>C has no sum types after 70 years so I dont think anyone will even think about panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending. Go 1.2097 will have it. It will be optional only<|eoopr|><|sor|>Why would I need language support for sum types when I can cast any pointer to any other type and `union` exists? They have played us for fools<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 24 |
programmingcirclejerk | Poddster | hu02hjd | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>I miss the days of casting everything to `(Object)` and back.<|eor|><|sor|>Under the hood I believe Java generics pretty much just do this automatically for you. I think this is sort of the reason why you can't do generics of non-boxed objects (e.g. ArrayList<int> will not compile but ArrayList<Integer> will).<|eor|><|sor|>Yep, Java's generics are not 'reified'. C#'s are, because it was made by competent people who saw what Java did and decided to do better.
Which explains perfectly why go never had generics until now.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 23 |
programmingcirclejerk | pikachu_palestrante | htzob92 | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|soopr|>C has no sum types after 70 years so I dont think anyone will even think about panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending. Go 1.2097 will have it. It will be optional only<|eoopr|><|sor|>```
typedef struct Result {
Tag tag;
union {
Ok ok;
Err err;
} value;
} Result;
```<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 22 |
programmingcirclejerk | rvalt | htytvyb | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>I miss the days of casting everything to `(Object)` and back.<|eor|><|sor|>Under the hood I believe Java generics pretty much just do this automatically for you. I think this is sort of the reason why you can't do generics of non-boxed objects (e.g. ArrayList<int> will not compile but ArrayList<Integer> will).<|eor|><|sor|>Coming from C#, this always infuriated me.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 22 |
programmingcirclejerk | maybeJenniferLopez | htyxv1q | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>I miss the days of casting everything to `(Object)` and back.<|eor|><|sor|>Under the hood I believe Java generics pretty much just do this automatically for you. I think this is sort of the reason why you can't do generics of non-boxed objects (e.g. ArrayList<int> will not compile but ArrayList<Integer> will).<|eor|><|sor|>Yep, this is also why generic types cannot extend Throwable for example. Because Java can't tell the difference between a hypothetical ExceptionType<Integer> and ExceptionType<String>.<|eor|><|sor|>Makes sense. Generics and exceptions are both pure evil and terrible concepts destroying languages. Combining them would create a language so evil, it would destroy the world.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 20 |
programmingcirclejerk | doomvox | htyu7k6 | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>>Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
-Rob "Commander" Pike<|eor|><|soopr|>Actually more like
> Those that fail to repeat history are doomed to learn from it.<|eoopr|><|sor|>The version I've always liked is "We're all doomed".<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 18 |
programmingcirclejerk | HINDBRAIN | htyix52 | <|sols|><|sot|>Java was released in 1996. It got generics in 2004, 8 years later. I don't remember anyone panicking and yelling from every corner that the world is ending.<|eot|><|sol|>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30047299<|eol|><|sor|>I miss the days of casting everything to `(Object)` and back.<|eor|><|sor|>Under the hood I believe Java generics pretty much just do this automatically for you. I think this is sort of the reason why you can't do generics of non-boxed objects (e.g. ArrayList<int> will not compile but ArrayList<Integer> will).<|eor|><|sor|>Java generics are ass sometimes. Like how to tell a json lib to serialize something as a list of longs you have to pass it some kind of new typereference<ArrayList<Long>>{} or some crap instead of an ArrayList<Long> directly. Where is my brutal practicality?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|> | 14 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.