reallyreason

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by reallyreason 1mo ago

   Indeed, at this point it's one of the most devalued terms in software. Every week I'm reading about some product calling itself "the Operating System for XYZ." It seems like it's what you do when "platform&quot
2. 2.▲
   by reallyreason 2mo ago

   Clicked through to the custom language it's implemented in ("Freedomlang") and was met with a bunch of really confusing AI-authored stuff. > macOS emits x86-64 AT&T assembly Seems like an obvious issue given that Apple
3. 3.▲
   by reallyreason 5mo ago

   It could also be argued that putting a specific executor model into the standard library will make the problem worse because it will give library crates license to use it without considering alternatives because it is standard. At least
4. 4.▲
   by reallyreason 5mo ago

   It really depends on the abstraction model of the library. If the library needs to actually read/write a file, it either needs to depend on a runtime or provide some horrific abstraction over the process it will use to do that. This do
5. 5.▲
   by reallyreason 5mo ago

   I think that's the problem in essence, yes. Different executors built on top of different primitives and having different executions strategies will have mutually incompatible constraints. To spawn a future on tokio, it has to implemen