Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Talos – Open-source WASM interpreter for Lean

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–34 of 34 posts

Re: Show HN: Talos – Open-source WASM interpreter for Lean

#31

Post by genxy »

himata4113 wrote: post #4

talos is already in use by https://github.com/siderolabs/talos , was confused for a second when I saw talos and wasm for a second, got excited about native wasm pod support.

It would be nice if we never talk about name collisions again. No one owns a common name, I'd actually consider it a form of stealing from the commons. Want fewer name collisions? Pick unique names!

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

> Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks.

Re: Show HN: Talos – Open-source WASM interpreter for Lean

#32

Post by genxy »

IshKebab wrote: post #15
sohex wrote: post #11

Do people just not even search their proposed name anymore?

It's ok for multiple different things to use the same name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_(disambiguation) I wish these comments were banned. They come up every time someone names a project with a name that was also used by one guy for his forgotten Lisp dialect in the 70s.

I agree, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48613064

Re: Show HN: Talos – Open-source WASM interpreter for Lean

#33

Post by quietusmuris »

mfornet wrote: post #28
quietusmuris wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that put the Rust compiler (and its assert lowering) in the trusted base? How do you know the asserts you wrote are the traps you're reasoning about?

> Doesn't that put the Rust compiler (and its assert lowering) in the trusted base? Yes, but I would argue the are already in the trusted base before this project, we are not removing that. We want instead remove "your code" from the trusted base, and just keep the compiler and the specs. > How do you know the asserts you wrote are the traps you're reasoning about? You just do. The asserts and the specs have a simila…

So the compiler's in the Trusted Base either way and the asserts are just part of the spec surface the user has to get right. Makes sense.
Post reply on HN