phaylon

8 ms·

1.
by phaylon 10mo ago
Something else I usually don't see: A system hitting a fail-safe is a lot easier to detect and handle from the outside than one that just enters an unknown invalid state. Like, if the rule were "Always-Keep-Running" then hosp
2.
by phaylon 1y ago
I've felt kind of miffed in the past for not being able to join Discord communities. Discord always wanted my phone number, and I wasn't ready to share that. I am no longer miffed :)
3.
by phaylon 1y ago
Not only Trump. Without the rules, Musk or Putin could run as well, the latter even work-from-home style. Also, if justice being blind is so bad before an election, why not after? Figuring out who won shouldn't involve any courts eithe
4.
by phaylon 2y ago
This just gives all the power to abusers. I'd rather fix the abuse (the cause of the particular burnout), because it impacts not only the Rust developers, but all current and future contributors, and indirectly us users as well.
5.
by phaylon 4y ago
You know, people outside the Rust community keep bringing this up as some kind of argument against it. But to me, it's one of the biggest points for it; because the important thing about `unsafe` encapsulation isn't what's
6.
by phaylon 4y ago
Small nitpick: Fortunately, `Rc` and `Arc` actually don't require the nightly feature.
7.
by phaylon 4y ago
From the Linux Plumbers Conference from a couple days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw9pKeJ-4Bw&t=8040s (Warning: It's a longer stream, but the timestamp should be where the driver is shown. There's a t
8.
by phaylon 4y ago
They're usually edge cases. For example let-chains changed the parsing logic for if-let constructs across all editions. I expect these to become even less frequent with ever rising amounts of Rust code that isn't on Github.
9.
by phaylon 4y ago
Just tried that command (wanted to give rebellion a bit of a go anyway) on my dual-core 4GB laptop with an SSD: real 5m18,721s; user 6m22,607s; sys 0m20,515s So, given that the SSD seems to make a difference, and looking at the build output
10.
by phaylon 5y ago
Been here 12.5 years and have 439 points. So I'm _almost_ there :)
11.
by phaylon 5y ago
Honestly, after running into the phone number requirement it's gonna be hard to get back my trust. You required the phone number after you got all my account details. You wouldn't let me remove my account without first giving you
12.
by phaylon 5y ago
Yeah. I'd assume a 2018 specific one would show up below https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/master/src/test/ui/ru... if needed.
13.
by phaylon 5y ago
It's the part of the Rust compiler test suite that makes sure odd syntactical combinations still behave as they are supposed to.
14.
by phaylon 5y ago
You can store it independently without it being borrowed. So your structs don't need lifetimes. I consider it a midpoint between `String` and `&str`. Most of the convenience of `String` (barring mutation) but less costly.
15.
by phaylon 5y ago
A `&str` is a borrow of the string slice data, and has borrowing semantics. An `std::sync::Arc<str>` on the other hand isn't borrowed but has shared ownership and is atomically reference counted. Does that answer the question
16.
by phaylon 5y ago
I usually just have a `type Text = std::sync::Arc<str>` at the root, specifically during prototyping :)
17.
by phaylon 5y ago
You might want to look into using `Arc<str>`. It's an immutable string slice that can have many owners and will be dropped once the last one is done with it.
18.
by phaylon 6y ago
> That last one is a common enough idea nowadays. Prominent people in every community advocate enforcing code style rules (Douglas Crawford's Javascript linter is famous as an early example and gofmt is practically enforced in the c
19.
by phaylon 7y ago
From my perspective, I'd say it's because there isn't much talk about Ada as a technology. It comes up a lot when Rust is discussed, but I never see details besides built-in ranges for numbers. I can't even remember ever
20.
by phaylon 7y ago
I actually tend to try and work with them. With this article as well, I tried to change my data settings instead of just leaving. But I gave up after following the 7th link without encountering a single setting, just more links to follow.
21.
by phaylon 7y ago
An edition is just another word for version. If the language were truly backwards compatible, you wouldn't have to tell tools like `rustc` which version/edition your code is written in.
22.
by phaylon 7y ago
How do you square your interpretation with the comment I linked to above?
23.
by phaylon 7y ago
Where do you get that understanding? All the comments and the summaries I've seen by language team members on this give me a different impression. See this comment from Niko for example: https://github.com/rust-lang&#x2
24.
by phaylon 7y ago
Once again something is at odds here. You give resounding "Yes" comments, but in the backwards compatibility discussions I had with language team members, those "Yes" comments were actually "not really our problem&q
25.
by phaylon 7y ago
No, that wasn't for soundness fixes. This is from the discussion surrounding syntax changes like turbofish or chained if-let bindings. Can you point me towards an authoritative post in the turbofish discussion that says that it can&#x2
26.
by phaylon 7y ago
Can I copy a module from an old project into a new crate and it will always work without adjustments? What about code examples from StackOverflow, or Github issues? Will these work without adjustments in my local project? Will a future synt
27.
by phaylon 7y ago
I've had many discussions and much pain about this topic. Can you tell me what I wrote that was specifically wrong? If backwards compatibility is guaranteed, turbofish cannot be "fixed". I can't find the link currently,
28.
by phaylon 7y ago
I still feel that there is more to language compatibility than "Can rustc run it with the right setting". Rust 2018 is a new version, the fact that it's not called 2.0 is just semantics. And I still believe "version inte
29.
by phaylon 7y ago
> We can’t get rid of it because we have a commitment to not breaking users’ code. This is not really true though. The commitment is about publicly visible and crater-testable code. If you have your own code in-house, there isn't mu
30.
by phaylon 8y ago
I think a full, accepted specification that is adjusted in line with design decisions is still a bit out. Because as soon as you have a blessed specification, people and tools and such are going to depend on it, which limits the ability to

More ›