So what will be the security flaws we will see in Rust-based software in the future? Seems like there are still many kinds of flaws that no language can prevent.
Many or most of the competitors would disagree it's not a race until KM 199. Only in boring flat races where the pack stays all together and there are no serious breakaways is that true.
How is this so? I thought RISC-V was fixed length, except for 16 bit compressed instructions. And afaik those aren't identified by a singular particular bit.
ARM has all these variations which make it seem as complicated as x86, but they are distict variations and future CPUs can for example drop 16 bit Thumb fairly clearly.
If you are talking about Erlang and D etc then your uses are unusual and not typically commercial and so I don't put much value in your response. No offense intended though.
Do these writers realize that multi-millionaires actually often eat at fast food restaurants? I could literally buy a hundred S class Mercedes cars and yet I went to Target a couple days ago to buy a dish scrubber and got a cheeseburger at a chain yesterday.
Half the outrage is the claim that these companies are paying no U.S. taxes. Is that claim substantially incorrect? There are all these details you mention, but if Google is avoiding paying US taxes on billions in profit then how much detail do people really need to know?
My favorite was a record single included with an issue that played a song but played with a differently every time (well up to eight times). Super Spectacular Day.
True, but text processing is still easier with UTF-32, because UTF-8 and UTF-16 strings need to be converted to UTF-32 before you can do anything with them.
I maintained a fork of webkit ~12 years ago and it was a nightmare to maintain because every couple months they would massively reengineer systems and result in hundreds of non-trivial file changes. And because webkit had a brain-dead way of implementing multi-platform support it meant you spent days or weeks re-integrating these changes.
I don't see how the large majority of security problems could be solved by any OS design. Human failures would just account for 95% of breaches instead of the current 85% (made up numbers). Not saying the OS improvements aren't useful nevertheless..