bluGill

my python doesn’t need to parse to pass cI, at least to long as I don’t write tests that run that code section. Checkmate all languages that have to compile. /s

Rust’s package manager doesn’t manage c++, python, or anything else. Since the real world should not be one language to rule them all any package system must handle all possible languages. Otherwist they are lacking.

I said this is a hard problem and might not even be solvable.

rust is not better than C++ if you are in any of those cases where rust doesn’t work. Not really worse, but not better either. If it works for you great, but it is worse for me as rust fight our homegrown system (which has a lot of warts )

Dependency management has to deal with the real world where what we didn’t know in 1970 hurts us.

I was a lot more productive in C++ 15 years ago when the current project was 100% greenfield. Now that the code is 15 years old I’m much less productive because over the years we have discovered mistakes we made. I suspect I’m still more productive than the average C++ programmer because 15 years ago modern C++ was known (c++11 was still a couple years away though) and so we didn’t do a lot of the mess that people hate on C++ for.

Which is to say I want to know how productive those programmers will be in 15 years when the shiny of rust has warn off and they are looking at years of what seemed like a good design but current requirements just don’t fit.

Added on top of that is a modern dependency management system that is severely needed in languages like C and C++

I won’t disagree, but what Rust did is not the correct answer. Better than C++ perhaps, but not good enough. In the real world my code is more than Rust. I’m having trouble using rust because all my existing code is C++ and the dependency management does not work well with my existing build system and dependency management. If you want a dependency manager it needs to cover all languages and be easy to plug in whatever I’m doing currently. This is NOT an easy problem (it might not even be possible to solve!), but if you fail you are useless for all the times where dependency management is hard.

Unfortuately c++ interoperability is hard. I wouldn’t write c++ without vector and other containers (templates). Or classes complete with inheiritance (rarely multiple) and thus name mangeling. I now have millions of lines of that stuff and it is hard to write anything else because it has to mix.

Crying over some C code I have to work with. I’m supposed to do a quick proof of concept but with all data passed by global variable.

Nothing is exposed. There are things I want exposed, but I don’t want to keep security patches up to date, even if there is a zero day. I’m looking for someone trustworthy to hire for things that it would be useful to expose, but they are hard to find.

mobiles and desktops are very diffrerent and need different user incerfaces. So you are not savin, much work. In fact trying to handle both in on may be worse because of all the special cases. Be glad you don’t have to support teletypes, they demand different user interfaces.

As a C++ developer memory safety catches my attention. I keep rejecting code reviews - in 2024! - because of naked new. Since experience proves I can’t get people to use the memory safety modern C++ offers I need to force the issue.

unfortunaty rust has other choices that don’t play well with our existing C++ so it will be a long road.

This article is about C# though, which is also memory safe. At least from the article (which is only a few paragraphs that doesn’t say anything more than the headline) there is no indication that microsoft is working on C or C++. (though we know from other sources that Rust is in the kernel where there is C and C++)

The article is clear that this is about C# not C++. Is the romance for managed languages wearing off - I wonder what issues they are seeing.

Microsoft is big in C++, but they are also pushing C++ to be a lot safer. Modern C++ isn’t as safe as rust, but it is still much safer than C or C++98.

Learning a programming language is not hard. there are thousands of choices. Before you ask for another one, first please check that there isn’t already one that meets your needs. Fragmentation of languages is not useful in general. It is rare to have an idea that hasn’t been tried before, so find someone who already has done that idea.

Ruby often comes up as a python alternative. There are a lot of other lesser known choices - but any of them will still be more popular (at least at first) than something you come up with and thus any of the will give more community support.

Why would you want that? What is wrong with python if you want an interpreted language with garbage collection? By contrast what is wrong with rust + a lot of crates (or C++/Ada/…) if you want a compiled language?

Zero cost abstractions are great because speed is very important for complex problems. Little things here and there make for modern computers that feel slower than my old 8 bit atari when trying to get work done.

Docker gives you a few different things which might or might not matter. Note that all of the following can be gotten in ways other than docker as well. Sometimes those ways are better, but often what is better is just opinion. There are downsides to some of the following as well that may not be obvious.

With docker you can take a container and roll it out to 100s of different machines quickly. this is great for scaling if your application can scale that way.

With docker you can run two services on the same machine that use incompatible versions of some library. It isn’t unheard of to try to upgrade your system and discover something you need isn’t compatible with the new library, while something else you need to upgrade needs the new library. Docker means each service gets separate copies of what is needs and when you upgrade one you can leave the other behind.

With docker you can test an upgrade and then when you roll it out know you are rolling out the same thing everywhere.

With docker you can move a service from one machine to a different one somewhat easily if needed. Either to save money on servers, or to use more as more power is needed. Since the service itself is in a docker you can just start the container elsewhere and change pointers.

With docker if someone does manage to break into a container they probably cannot break into other containers running on the same system. (if this is a worry you need to do more risk assessment, they can still do plenty of damage)

the problem with automatic meta communities
is not all are the same despite the name. Communities on a nsfw server do not belong with the rest. I can imagine a server where the policy\purpose is to mock a topic, or mayb humor takes servers.

Only if you go there. In my experience code doesn’t

what is the usecase for going beyond maxint? Sure I can make it defined, but your program will have a bug if you do it. Defined just means platforms with a different behavior have to insert checks all over for something that rarely haypens