“I’m sorry” 10 hours late followed by an excuse, plus he doubled down hard after the first one.
Hard not to be turned off of the Zig language after this kind of thing. Looks like he deleted the original tweet and is in full damage control mode
Hard not to be turned off of the Zig language after this kind of thing. Looks like he deleted the original tweet and is in full damage control mode
Open source communities are not homogenous, and they involve humans. People have bad days, people say things that aren’t well thought out, some times it takes a while for someone to come around to why what they said was hurtful, counter productive, etc. I don’t know the country of origin for this person, but some cultures have a much more direct and confrontational style of communication.
Use the language or don’t, but if this is the reason you don’t, maybe spend some time reflecting on why a relatively unimportant interaction appears to have affected you so strongly.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/MINASWAN
Anyways, Loris Cro is not a random single person, he's more like the public face of the leadership team. For context, Loris is framing the greater conversation as punching back against Rust's dishonest marketing practices.
Should this matter if you like to use the tool? Not for me. But I'm not going to be confused when people look at the PR smell and feel averted.
As for the marketing debate, trying to manage expectations wrt to Zig is one of the main things that I do, and sometimes people do get too excited and imagine that the tool is able to do things that it ultimately cannot. Tampering that enthusiasm and trying to stay concrete is something that I try to do with great care. My impression is that when it comes to Rust, some of the arguments in extreme favor of rust (Rust protects you from everything) and also against Rust (Rust is useless because the compiler uses LLVM, which is C++) IMO both stem from mistakes in how the safety story is taught.
That said, I'm saying this to provide context to my perspective, not as a justification to my outburst.
https://twitter.com/pcwalton/status/1568302065851707392
Patrik's comment came before croloris's flame, and around the same time Zig was praised in the recent GameJam thread. The trade-off between memory safety and performance triggered a minor flamewar which Patrick heated by asserting that Zig wasn't memory safe and it violated "consensus".
He was asking if the idea of memory safety was consensus and didn’t say that things against it were not consensus.
I see this, and I agree that rust evangelists often go way too far and motte & bailey in arguments about safety. These arguments are safe to ignore. More importantly, if you engage with that class of argument; there's no winning. You certainly won't convince them of a thing, but you risk looking the fool. Keep your head up and talk about the many merits of Zig.
can you explain that? I see this as one person (a person who is not the Zig language itself) having an opinion, being passionate about it, then realizing a mistake was made, and then learning from it and (very likely) becoming a better person for it?
or are you really someone who thinks "Eric Clapton is super duper racist so it's hard not to be turned off of music entirely"
I do what the person behind those tweets did very often, on this site, and every time I realize my mistake and become a better person because of what I learn.
Not that he’s actually comparable to Eric Clapton, but yknow.
I acted out, and I'm acknowledging the mistake. If you want to submit a bug report, make sure to follow the template and you will be treated well.