3a2d29

I think the part where I have several negative votes on those comments, despite making points I think are valid, is what I don’t like.

My understanding is that negative votes is for things that don’t contribute to discussion, yet all my comments are in the negatives except when I mentioned I actually am using rust. Then suddenly the commenter stops talking about our discussion all together and starts to mention learning rust.

It’s frustrating because I like rust, but I can’t seem to criticize it in the slightest.

No I am not referring to that thread. I am referring to the thread further down where someone compares using a memory unsafe language to an illegal activity.

If you need an example of the rust community being toxic, I give you https://github.com/actix/actix-web

Look up the history and realize they bullied an open source project leader into leaving open source for good.

Okay, just to fact check this. I am a fan of Rust, but pretending there aren't these aggressive rust users is a bit putting your head in the sand.

Like any language that has very cool features, there are people that take that tool as not a tool but a religion.

You can even look in my comment history and see people arguing with me when I say I was a rust fan, but memory safety isn't a requirement in some areas of programming. One person made it there mission to convince me that can't possibly be the case and in (in my example of video games) that any memory bug crashes and game and will make users quit and leave.

I might be missing something here. So I understand panic! will essentially crash the kernel, that makes sense to me as a problem.

But wouldn't reading outside an array bounds also possibly do that? It coudl seg fault which is essentially the same thing.

Is it that reading out of bounds on an array isn't guaranteed to crash everything while a panic always will?

But Go can’t be used for all low level programming. Of course a GCed language is easier to read, it’s simpler at the cost of performance.

Rust complexity is more of a debate about low level programming below Go. Where only C/C++ and Rust exist. Can there be a simpler language in that space?

I actually have started learning rust and I do like it. I am hoping to get to a point where the ownership structure becomes obvious in my mind.

If I had to make a game right now though, I would be way faster in C++.

That said though, I do hope as I learn rust everything becomes obvious. I would be very happy if I get equally as productive (since that means I can use rust for everything).

I guess I just worry that certain things are like custom graph data structures, where suddenly ownership is a huge issue.

Doesn’t this counter your first point? A broken appliance isn’t against the law.

Second, I think data shows most people don’t return games after 1 crash. In fact, I think getting to market fast is a bigger factor for profit.

Against the law cause if you do this on a bridge, people die.

If a play Civ V and it crashes, I just a bit mad.

I will acknowledge though good engineering practices are important, maybe my perspective of "tolerance" of these bugs when they are isolated is missing the point.

I would agree that seg faults are not fun to debug, but if you think you can be speed up production and get the product done several orders of magnitude faster without ownership rules AND you can't use a GC, I do think it could be worth the trade-off.

> Why do you think it's especially aimed at Zig?

I honestly don't use zig so I really don't have a horse in the race, but when I read: "nothing but Rust or Go has any merit as a replacement unless it also bring the same safety. A fully unsafe language in 2022 is dumb"

That seems to be targeted at replacing C++, which both Carbon and CppFront are not doing per se. Zig is the next big "low level replacement language" (that isn't Rust or Go) that HN seems to chat about so I took a guess.

Again, I don't think that's too relevant to my point (although I am curious if OP wants to weigh in on what they meant).

While I would like to see C++ improve, I would argue that this really is reinventing the wheel when Carbon is being worked on.

I guess the only thing cppfront would offer is mixed syntax within one file, but I could even see Carbon implementing something like that.

"A fully unsafe language in 2022 is dumb."

I think this is a subtweet at Zig, and while I am not a zig developer, I will point something out that everyone forgets (to defend C++ and Zig and the like): Some apps don't need memory safety.

For example a single player game or application that runs just on your own machine, memory safety would just be another type of bug.

If dealing with Rust's ownership rules is annoying and you don't want a GC, then you can certainly use an unsafe language. Not all apps are websites and browsers.

I would also add (I could be wrong here) but I think things written in web assembly can also be unsafe, as the memory is in a sandbox. I think I heard this once, but I could be wrong.

Gotta mention rust, how else will you get upvotes on HN?

Unpopular opinion, but you can’t just look at “companies made more profits” and decide that means WFH is more productive.

People starting dying from covid while crypto markets soared, so I guess killing people with covid fuels bitcoin.

Or possible they huge money printing influenced the picture.

EDIT: Not saying we weren’t more productive, just saying that HN tends to be very scientific but is really ignoring correlation != causation which we all would point out for most other things.

I think that and retention. It’s well known that remote jobs make it way easier to jump, plus people are less attached to their coworkers.

That’s still not a good reason, since you are essentially trying to guilt people into staying or making their life more busy so interviewing is harder.

Market is cold, so now’s the time to do RTO. All the people considering quitting will have a much harder time putting their money where their mouth is.

I am a bit of a pessimist but RTO feels inevitable to me.

This is an underrated point

Friend currently works there and has worked their for a year. A year of no coding sounds rough, but I guess he isn't jumping cause he is worried about the pending recession.

I know a friend who got a job there. Many teams do not do any coding at all. Like most banks they have automated away all the programming and have little need for new tech.

The new job has everything except low level programming. I am debating rolling the dice and seeing if I get an offer with everything + doing the area of programming I want.

Thanks!

Yeah I feel like taking the job would be a good move, but since you mentioned risk I wanna ask.

Wouldn’t not taking the job be the risk taker option? The current offer I know is good and most of what I want. Or I could turn it down and continue applying (rolling the dice) on getting an even better job offer in the next month or so?

The job I got the offer from moved after than the others. Also two of the companies had hiring freezes and eliminated the position while I was interviewing.

"Almost 400 PhD economists working at the Fed. Last year they got inflation completely wrong. This year they got growth completely wrong. What use are they?"

I know they have been very wrong, but I imagine economists at the fed get extremely tired of the public constantly acting like they know monetary policy better.

I feel like if someone did the equivalent of this to doctors that it would be seen as ridiculous, but someone everyone who has taken econ 101 is entitled to declare how the economy works.

Definitely a good example, although you can extend it to so many. In the US if you say "tech" people suddenly scramble to you because everyone is afraid of betting against you and becoming blockbuster.

Ex: Wework is another one. Many of the big rich real estate families in NYC all were heavily invested in it. None of them wanted to be the dinosaur left behind even with a company that was claiming to be "tech" without really being tech.

Not to sound like a pessimist, but I don't take anything like this seriously. "Political Party resumes fight for popular thing" really means "political party knows how to quickly get some good PR"

You can't take what politicians publicly support at face value unless they are proposing a law that will be passed because they hold the numbers to pass it.

Its easy to pick up some popular thing and parade it around when you will never have to put your money where your mouth is.

Can't add to Amazon, but wanted to add another example of stack ranking problems.

I and some friends worked for Capital One, which does stack ranking (but not the intense PIP that Amazon does).

Overall the stack ranking isn't a huge issue, but you get screwed because those boxes are subjective, which I always felt was the big issue with any system like this.

I worked easily 9-6 most days and got an average rating, while I buddy of mine in a different org would work maybe 4 hours a day and get the same rating. My org had intense work and my manager saw that as the norm.

Again not terrible, but I would be incredibly mad if say this same system conspired to putting me on PIP. Working more and longer hours but not meeting the definition of average for your specific manager and team.

Based on this argument, shouldn’t Ross’ murder-for-hires be included in sentencing then?

Clearly he didn’t just build a drug website, he was fine ending lives for it. A slap on the wrist (even if his family thinks he is a good guy) wouldn’t deter him much, it would seem.

Could be survivor bias. All legacy code that isn't terrible is rewritten. All terrible legacy code isn't touched by anyone and therefore remains.

If this were true, and most kids are doing a cost/benefit analysis about future wealth, then we would say far more engineering/math majors.

To add, there are so many kids that go to college just because it’s suppose to be the next chapter of life.

Allowing people to learn trades while still having “the college experience” I think would fix this.

+1 to this

I ageee managers optimize for their own success, at the expense of the company, but how does that make them morons?

Sure the company is hurt and work grinds to a halt, but are you saying the rational thing to do is take actions that don’t optimize for your own success?