Thanks for highlighting your username - made me notice that you post a lot of nonsense here so I can easily block it!

Yes that’s true, but the point is you should have to opt in to surprising or risky behaviour.

The non-strict versions also panic by default, but only in debug mode. So if you were willing to use abs() you should be willing to use strict_abs().

Arguably a bit of a mistake to have the “obvious” function names be surprisingly unsafe, but I guess it’s too late to fix that.

They’re released on a schedule so they are often quite boring.

AI AI blah blah AI.

Also why is HCL supposedly the 9th most popular “programming language” (which it isn’t anyway)?

There are some examples in the very first list I found googling for “cancel culture examples”.

Not all of them are political (e.g. cancelling someone for sexual assault is clearly not, and that Heineken one… how??), but a decent number are, e.g. number 6 is about as partisan as you can get.

It’s a fairly inevitable reaction to cancel culture. This was predicted and warned against when left-wing cancel culture was at its height, but people didn’t listen. Now we have right-wing cancel culture instead.

I wouldn’t recommend the Gang of Four book. Many of the design patterns they espouse are way over complicated from the days of peak OOP. You know, FactoryFactoryVisitor stuff. Usually best avoided.

Yeah, I use Claude/ChatGPT sometimes for:

• Throwaway scripts: “write me a bash script to delete all merged git branches starting with ‘foo’”
• Writing functions that are tedious to look up but I can fairly easily evaluate for correctness: “write a C function to spawn a process and capture stdout and stderr merged”
• Doing stuff in systems I’m not very familiar with: “write an OCaml function to copy a file”

I haven’t got around to setting up any of that agentic stuff yet. Based on my experience of the chat stuff I’m a bit skeptical it will be good enough to be useful on anything of the complexity I work on. Find for CRUD apps but it’s not going to understand niche compiler internals or do stuff with WASM runtimes that nobody has ever done before.

This doesn’t seem to have any advantages over normal TSX components.

I think you misread my comment. I didn’t say it was a non-commercial project.

I still don’t think it’s fair to say it’s not open source. It clearly is. What you mean is it’s not a non-commercial project.

I think it’s a perfectly reasonable license. You can also use it for free with closed source projects, except embedded projects (where most of the money is), which I think is generous.

I don’t think everything has to be completely free. I’d much rather they had a viable business model and actually continue existing than just fizzle out because they have no funding source. Writing a high quality GUI toolkit is an enormous task so it’s not really going to happen otherwise.

As much as I’m following egui, Xylem, Dioxus, Makepad etc. and hope they succeed I’d put my money on Slint being the first to make a Rust GUI toolkit of the same quality as Qt.

He’s right, zstd is incredibly popular, quite widely used and also generally believed to be the best compression algorithm overall.

Or don’t. Alternatives are available - often with nicer interfaces!

IMO the main reason to use curl is that Chrome lets you copy web requests as a curl command line.

They use QAM and similar because it’s the best way to transmit data over a small number of long wires. Exactly the opposite of wires inside a CPU.

This video confuses at least three different concepts - quantum uncertainty, ternary computers, and “unknown” values.

Ternary computers are just not as good as binary computers. The way silicon works, it’s always going to be much much slower.

“Unknown” values can be useful - they are common in SystemVerilog for example. But you rarely just have true, false and unknown, so it makes zero sense to bake that into the hardware. Verilog has 4 values - true, false, unknown and disconnected. VHDL has something like 9!

And even then the “unknown” isn’t as great as you might think. It’s basically poor-man’s symbolic execution and is unable to cope with things like let foo = some_unknown_value ? true : true. Yes that does happen and you won’t like the “solution”.

High level programming concepts like option will always map more cleanly onto binary numbers.

Overall, very confused video that is trying to make it sound like there’s some secret forgotten architecture or alternative history when there definitely isn’t.

I disagree. That’s how Python works but it sucks because it means instead of a C++ (for example) project with some Python utility scripts scattered inside it, you have to turn it into a proper Python project, when it isn’t a Python project; you just have some Python scripts in it.

Basically it throws away the ad-hoc scripting use case entirely.

This is awesome. It gets closer to Deno which I think is one of the only things that have actually solved the “ad hoc scripting” challenge, which requires:

1. Easy to install language.
2. Easy to use third party dependencies (from a single file script).
3. Easy to import from other files without setting up a whole project.
4. IDE support.

At one end we have Deno which nails all of those. At the other, Python which fails all of them pretty miserably (despite this being one the most popular use cases for Python).

Seems like with this Rust will have 1 and 2 solved, and I guess 4 isn’t too hard. What about 3 though?

If I eventually decide I want to split my one file script into two files will I be able to?

Edit: I had a play and actually it’s good news!

• If you want to split up a script you can just do mod foo and it will look for foo.rs (or I guess foo/mod.rs) in the same directory!
• For common code, which you might want to import from e.g. ../../common you can’t just use mod but you can add common = { path = "../../common" } to [dependencies]. That directory has to be a proper crate with Cargo.toml but I think that’s ok and probably desirable.

The only downsides I found are:

1. No IDE support yet.
2. It prints compilation messages to stdout, which kind of sucks.
3. Even after it has been built, it still does incremental compilation every time you run it, leading to more compilation message noise, and ~100ms startup time.

You said output is useless

No I said it’s not very useful.

There’s zero cost to using it instead of a div so the only reason not to use it is to purposefully screw users who need accessibility features.

No, the main reason is because people don’t know about it, because it’s an extra thing to remember for little benefit. Same reason other semantic-only tags like article get very little use.

only differ from div in styles

Err yeah the “only” do a really useful thing that lots of people want.

If output came with some nice styling and maybe animations… maybe a built in copy-to-clipboard option… then people would have used it.