Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD? • Hacker News Board

Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?

#341

Post by littlestymaar » Thu, Dec 07, 2017, 10:56 AM UTC

littlestymaar wrote: post #339

oscargrouch wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean this in the most non-confrontational way: have you actually used/looked at Rust? I follow Rust since Graydon Hoare's initial vision for it. Which i love it when it first came out. The garbage collected Rust had so much potential, in my point of view. Then when i started to follow it, it was chaging into this current encarnation trying to chase C++, and market as a better C++. I've coded in it for a period of…

> The first Rust vision, now was re-created even more beautifully in Swift. Had you said Poney I'd have agreed, but I don't see how Swift matches the first Rust vision (a safe concurrency model).

I meant Pony[1] obviously

[1]https://www.ponylang.org/

Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?

#342

Post by kelnos » Thu, Dec 07, 2017, 9:40 PM UTC

drb91 wrote: post #330

kelnos wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD has as a goal to run on much more than just standard currently-sold consumer hardware. You can certainly disagree with that goal, but that doesn't make it go away.

Oh I totally get this—but what is this hardware that people are still using OpenBSD with that they haven't upgraded in 30 years? Targeting i386 as opposed to, say, i486 or i686 seems like an exercise in idealistic masochism.

I think you're misunderstanding: "i386" is just shorthand for "32-bit Intel". They're not specifically talking about the 80386 chip. The same problem exists when you consider newer 32-bit chip families in that ISA.

Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?

#343

Post by kelnos » Thu, Dec 07, 2017, 9:46 PM UTC

HumanDrivenDev wrote: post #324

sanderjd wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your parent's response wasn't passive aggressive at all, it was a direct statement of their view of the problem with people who think the problem is other people being "thin skinned".

Really not sure how you don't see it. Mimicking my sentence structure, implying that people who talk like me are ostracised by society (!?), and using phrases like "incredibly toxic". I could almost hear the tone of voice reading that sentence.

I assure you that you have no idea what tone of voice I was using. There was absolutely nothing passive-aggressive about my response to you.

I was merely pointing out how you're flat-out wrong, and I am super tired of people who somehow believe that feelings, emotions, and empathy don't matter in communication. There are some people (such as yourself) who seem to believe they don't, but in the end that just ends up being short-sighted, non-inclusive thinking that drastically reduces the number of people who want to associate/work/do business with you. If that's ok with you, then by all means, continue to engage in boorish behavior, and I'm sure in the end you'll reap what you sow.

So... is that "blunt" enough for you?

Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?

#344

Post by avhon1 » Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 5:50 AM UTC

drb91 wrote: post #192

2trill2spill wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This seems like a bit of a trite point unless many rust developers are actually working inside i386. Though the compiler itself might not work very well in i386. Trite point? OpenBSD supports 1386[1] if they pull a rust compiler into base and start rewriting things in rust, then they can't support 1386. Dropping a supported platform is not a "trite point". [1]: https://www.openbsd.org/plat.html

How do you even find an i386 processor these days?

AMD still sells Opteron CPUs [0]. You can buy new servers with them [1].

[0] https://www.amd.com/en-us/products/server/opteron

[1] https://www.thinkmate.com/systems/servers/rax/amd#browse