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

Rust 1.5

blog.rust-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 159 posts

Re: Rust 1.5

#81

Post by rewqfdsa »

untothebreach wrote: post #71
rhodysurf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the master/slave thing pisses me off. They are words in the dictionary used to describe something and that is all.

Except that people's experience of words doesn't come from the dictionary. Words aren't experienced in a vacuum, people assign different meanings to words based on their own experiences. To some of us, "master/slave" is just a phrase to describe an architecture. To others of us, it has historical connotations that makes it inappropriate.

Concepts don't stop existing merely because you ban the words used to refer to them. Masters and slaves have always existed in human history and will probably always exist. When we use the terms in software, we draw a metaphor from this experience. There's nothing wrong with that.

Re: Rust 1.5

#82

Post by tangent128 »

kozukumi wrote: post #35
andyl wrote: post #23

Browsing the names of contributors, I was surprised at the lack of gender diversity. Four or five female contributors at the very most. Rates of female participation below 5% - wow. Why is Rust lang so anti-female?

I hope you are trolling. Would more women in tech be good? Of course! However there is some crazy SJW stuff going on at the moment in a lot of projects. People pushing for things like Master/Slave to be renamed to Leader/Follower. Wanting things like man (as in the man command on Linux) renamed to something non-gender-based. I mean fucking come on. I am all for a more inclusive environment but some things are just st…

Looking at their comment history, "trolling" is a safe bet.

And I would assume anybody accusing the man(ual) command of being gendered is being disingenuous until proven otherwise.

(That said, growing up in the American South, I've seen enough disgusting attitudes still persisting that preserving established replicated systems terminology is not a hill I'm in the mood to die on.)

Re: Rust 1.5

#83

Post by steveklabnik »

issaria wrote: post #79
easytiger wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is called humour.

> . Period. This is not humour, this is aggressive.

I apologize, I was going for humor. No aggression was intended. Humor is hard in text.

What I meant with the "period" is that our schedule isn't tied to features, if a feature isn't ready, it just misses the release and goes into the next one. I can say, unless there's some kind of catastrophe, that Rust 1.6 will be released on the 21st of January.

Re: Rust 1.5

#84

Post by untothebreach »

rewqfdsa wrote: post #81
untothebreach wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that people's experience of words doesn't come from the dictionary. Words aren't experienced in a vacuum, people assign different meanings to words based on their own experiences. To some of us, "master/slave" is just a phrase to describe an architecture. To others of us, it has historical connotations that makes it inappropriate.

Concepts don't stop existing merely because you ban the words used to refer to them. Masters and slaves have always existed in human history and will probably always exist. When we use the terms in software, we draw a metaphor from this experience. There's nothing wrong with that.

I don't see where anyone has proposed we "ban" any words at all. What I see are people who suggest that we use a different set of words, that accomplish the same ends as "master/slave," except with words that aren't associated with slavery.

> "Masters and slaves have always existed in human history and will probably always exist"

I don't understand this argument. I'm not saying your statement is wrong, but I fail to see how this is a justification for using the words in a technical context.

Re: Rust 1.5

#85

Post by kbenson »

issaria wrote: post #79
easytiger wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is called humour.

> . Period. This is not humour, this is aggressive.

You seem to think he is implying something about go. I'm pretty sure whatever you think is being communicated in the original comment was not the intention.

Try asking for clarification rather than stating your interpretation of what someone said as fact. Try giving people the benefit of a doubt. To my eyes, the only one being aggressive here is you, when others are just trying to correct what appears to be your misinterpretation of the original statement.

Re: Rust 1.5

#86

Post by grayrest »

mangeletti wrote: post #11

I've been excited to try Rust for some time now, but I've been holding off, only because I'm primarily developing web applications and I've heard from a few people that Rust is better suited for other tasks (based on the built-ins, packages, etc.?), despite there being at least a few frameworks out there. What are your thoughts on this? Have things changed? Is the assumption just dead wrong, and Rust is in fact treme…

It'll get there simply because the language is doing pretty well and lots of people write web servers but it's not there yet. Once someone figures out "the way" to do an internet-facing async http/http2/websocket server I think we'll see a lot more motion in the Rust web dev space.

Re: Rust 1.5

#87

Post by rewqfdsa »

untothebreach wrote: post #84
rewqfdsa wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Concepts don't stop existing merely because you ban the words used to refer to them. Masters and slaves have always existed in human history and will probably always exist. When we use the terms in software, we draw a metaphor from this experience. There's nothing wrong with that.

I don't see where anyone has proposed we "ban" any words at all. What I see are people who suggest that we use a different set of words, that accomplish the same ends as "master/slave," except with words that aren't associated with slavery. > "Masters and slaves have always existed in human history and will probably always exist" I don't understand this argument. I'm not saying your statement is wrong, but I fail to…

I don't accept that we can't use words that accurately describe a concept merely because some people find that concept unpleasant.

Re: Rust 1.5

#88

Post by rewqfdsa »

bajsejohannes wrote: post #58
kozukumi wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you are trolling. Would more women in tech be good? Of course! However there is some crazy SJW stuff going on at the moment in a lot of projects. People pushing for things like Master/Slave to be renamed to Leader/Follower. Wanting things like man (as in the man command on Linux) renamed to something non-gender-based. I mean fucking come on. I am all for a more inclusive environment but some things are just st…

I would certainly welcome changing master/slave to leader/follower. It's no less clear, and it doesn't associate my software with something I'm deeply against. People might have different reactions to this thing so what's a stupid change to you might be a crucial change to someone else. (I agree that changing man is a little silly as it's obviously short for manual)

How about kill(2)? Why does the POSIX committee endorse murder?

Re: Rust 1.5

#89

Post by dikaiosune »

lmm wrote: post #78
mangeletti wrote: post #11

I've been excited to try Rust for some time now, but I've been holding off, only because I'm primarily developing web applications and I've heard from a few people that Rust is better suited for other tasks (based on the built-ins, packages, etc.?), despite there being at least a few frameworks out there. What are your thoughts on this? Have things changed? Is the assumption just dead wrong, and Rust is in fact treme…

Rust is immature in general. It will probably make a perfectly good language for web, comparable to e.g. OCaml, though the manual memory management is always going to add a little bit of overhead. IMO the web is a lot like anything else, and the best web languages are just the best general-purpose programming languages.

I haven't written a lot of Rust, but what manual memory management are you referring to? As far as I can tell, the whole point of the language is that you don't have to worry about that if you listen to the compiler.

Re: Rust 1.5

#90

Post by logophobia »

wyldfire wrote: post #21

Congrats to the team! I recently wrote my first Rust [1] project. Great experience, IMO. I faced a lot of interesting challenges because my use case was a little outside of typical. But I tried to minimize 'unsafe' and I was still satisfied with the results so far. I know I've only just scratched the surface of the language and I'm looking forward to learning more. [1] https://github.com/androm3da/libfaultinj

Just a small remark. You might want to note in your readme why you'd want to use a fault-injection library. I wasn't familiar with the concept, and had to google why you'd want to do that (for testing unexpected errors and the application's handling of those errors).
Post reply on HN