redbar0n

6 ms·

1.
Jam – Programming Language (C-like, safe, no lifetime syntax)(rapha.land)
12 points by redbar0n 4mo ago|1 comments
2.
by redbar0n 4mo ago
What’s unique about Jam is that it tries to keep the ergonomics of a C-like language while enforcing safety without a garbage collector or lifetime annotations. Its main differentiators are owned bindings with automatic drop, no undefined o
3.
by redbar0n 5mo ago
It's a bit ironic that the "Good fit" for "When High Level Rust Makes Sense" lists all the use cases where someone would typically _not_ reach for Rust, and "Not a fit" lists all the use cases for when peo
4.
by redbar0n 5mo ago
I think it's because majority of people using Rust come from C++ where the devx is way worse. But I think what pulls down the devx is the perceived steep learning curve, plus lifetimes.
5.
by redbar0n 5mo ago
Crystal's issues list 785 open issues tagged as bugs, as of today, 16. april 2026: https://github.com/crystal-lang/crystal/issues?q=state%3Aope... Is that normal? Or does someone just really need to close som
6.
by redbar0n 6mo ago
Just remember Rob Pike's 1st rule: don't assume where bottlenecks will occur, but verify it.
7.
by redbar0n 9mo ago
How could CSS (or any language) have been designed so that these mistakes could have easily been corrected today in any case? If the mentioned mistakes or similar language design mistakes were made. Because mistakes will always be made. (Un
8.
by redbar0n 9mo ago
x = x + 1 always annoyed me as a syntax for binding, when first learning programming, coming from using = in equational reasoning in mathematics. x: x + 1 would have been more natural as assignment/binding, imho.
9.
by redbar0n 9mo ago
In two concepts: syntactic sugar vs syntactic vinegar.
10.
The Case Against the Nuclear Atom(unbekoming.substack.com)
2 points by redbar0n 10mo ago|0 comments
11.
The One-Step Trap (In AI Research), by Richard Sutton(incompleteideas.net)
2 points by redbar0n 1y ago|0 comments
12.
by redbar0n 1y ago
I did not dismiss speech’s potential to cause hurt feelings, I acknowledged and affirmed it. It is not to be taken lightly. Yet, we need an effective demarcation between speech and physical action, where resorting to physical action is deem
13.
by redbar0n 1y ago
I am not arguing that terms cannot be used in broader or more expansive or even metaphorical meaning. But I am arguing that the accuracy/essence of the term «violence» ought to be respected. Especially because diluting it (i.e. washing
14.
by redbar0n 1y ago
The fact that the Wikipedia page on «verbal abuse» has to use «verbal» as a prefix term to the terms «abuse», «violence», «assault» etc. actually underscores the point: If those terms were obviously verbal in nature, then «verbal» wouldn’t
15.
by redbar0n 1y ago
Why would you even need to say «call for violence» if speech were violence in itself? No one is opposing the fact that speech can be used to call for violence, but that doesn’t make the speech itself violence. The speech part of it is the «
16.
by redbar0n 1y ago
Distinguishing speech from violence is not to dismiss the potential for speech to cause hurt feelings.
17.
by redbar0n 1y ago
From each except the first: - «force, assault» - «action» - «an act of aggression» Which stands in contrast to «speech». Though any expression can be used in a broader sense than what it essentially/accurately signifies. Some such exam
18.
by redbar0n 1y ago
The post could have been called «The Unexpected Woes of Scalability: Few in-betweens».
19.
by redbar0n 1y ago
You should look up the definitions of the word «violence». You seem to be using violence figuratively (synonymously with ‘injustice’), but ignoring it’s essential and accurate definition. Both Britannica, Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and Merriam-
20.
by redbar0n 1y ago
The flying wrenches remind me of the Gravity gun i Half-Life 2 :D
21.
by redbar0n 1y ago
«Freedom software» is what they should call it. It would remove the awkward ad-hoc parentheses at every instance. Besides: The Americans will LOVE it!
22.
by redbar0n 1y ago
Unbundled won over bundled approach, even for RedwoodJS itself (which is now renamed Redwood GraphQL): "Unbundled Integrations: Over the coming months, we'll progressively unbundle third-party integrations—such as the authenticati
23.
by redbar0n 1y ago
This was clarifying: https://redwoodjs.com/blog/redwoodsdk See also earlier thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43592998 RedwoodJS is going into maintenance mode and is named Redwood GraphQL.
24.
by redbar0n 2y ago
> He turned "same form" into "homoiconic" with the help of Greek/Latin. «same form» in Greek would rather be «homomorphic». (Or in latin «eademforma», which could maybe be turned to «idoform» in english) «Homoico
25.
by redbar0n 2y ago
No, because you can see when a website is using design components that imitate a particular platform (iOS, Android), like Ionic. Because the UI elements wouldn’t naturally look like that on a website if it wasn’t. They would look like stand
26.
by redbar0n 2y ago
If only there was One.
27.
by redbar0n 2y ago
Yeah, I’ll add that the decision to use RN if you already have a couple of native apps is way harder than if you are starting out with RN. I think the former was why AirBnB reverted their RN foray, and it seems to match your experience.
28.
by redbar0n 2y ago
To target iOS, Android and Web, you’d have to write 3 apps / frontends then, instead of just 1 (with One). On React Native then One uses Expo, which is used in a lot of top tier and complex apps. For more about the CTO type decision of
29.
by redbar0n 2y ago
Context: Tamagui Takeout is a paid fullstack starter kit based on Tamagui (and Drizzle): https://tamagui.dev/takeout They’ve started a rewrite of Takeout to One (Zero instead of Drizzle, etc.), and are grandfathering in all
30.
by redbar0n 2y ago
Someone asked on the other news item about onestack.dev : > What is the added value of using it over just Expo? My answer: The added value of One is crossplatform compatibility with SSR, and HMR, all using Vite as the single bundler on a

More ›