41–50 of 174 posts
The OP mentions in passing that Brendan Eich "was solidly on team Rust" prior to leaving Mozilla, but adds no further details to that intriguing statement. Wouldn't that make Eich the Most Unrecognized Contributor? I don't think his name would be on any commit repo, after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your affirmation is true, why many of HN users (me included) get [dupe] at first place? In general, Is not the HN intention to decrease number of duplicates? If not so then HN should provide a solution for prevent this, such prevention that is not happening today. Example search input. Sorry but I'm seeing big contradictions in the so called rules. Just one example: > If a story has not had significant attention i…
> > If a story has not had significant attention in the last year or so, a small number of reposts is ok. Otherwise we bury reposts as duplicates. > > "in the last year or so" > Not in the same month or even after some hours later. A year is the expiration date on reposts of items that _have_ had significant discussion. Items which did not have significant discussion, and also did not have a large quantity of reposts…
Essentially I still don't understand why some get label as duplicated and some others not.
Anyway, Unfortunately https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html is not clear at all for me and I think HN needs to make it more obvious to help members to understand without doubts or contradictions, which was the case for me.
So I will contact HN soon in order to request an account deletion.
Thanks for try to explain me about it.
PD. Sorry for the deviation of these comments from the main topic here. But I think my concern is already expressed on previous comments.
But I derive a great deal of my current livelihood from Rust and helping firms use it well, so thank you, Dave.
If nothing else, maybe I'll be looking more closely at my next tools, and hoping they have their own Daves quietly advocating for their success.
Rust maybe a little adhoc in places (e.g. the misappropriated Haskell/ML function syntax, enum/struct asymmetry), but overall it is a fantastic effort. It is not an easy task to combine an advanced static type-system with mainstream ergonomics, but they seemed to have pulled it off. The fact that it is also not owned and controlled by a single big tech entity is icing on the cake. I really hope it achieves even great…
I'm curious, could you elaborate?
I confess I'm pretty ignorant about the history and origins of Rust, and it's not something I tend to investigate deeply for a lot of my tools. But I derive a great deal of my current livelihood from Rust and helping firms use it well, so thank you, Dave. If nothing else, maybe I'll be looking more closely at my next tools, and hoping they have their own Daves quietly advocating for their success.
The article doesn't mention it but this is of course a very good long term strategy. Things students learn during their formative years at university will bear fruit once they enter the work force.
How many of those students are now at or about to enter important positions in the industry?
Do you think Java could have become this big if it wasn't teached at so many universities at the entry level?
Rust maybe a little adhoc in places (e.g. the misappropriated Haskell/ML function syntax, enum/struct asymmetry), but overall it is a fantastic effort. It is not an easy task to combine an advanced static type-system with mainstream ergonomics, but they seemed to have pulled it off. The fact that it is also not owned and controlled by a single big tech entity is icing on the cake. I really hope it achieves even great…
> misappropriated Haskell/ML function syntax, enum/struct asymmetry I'm curious, could you elaborate?
foo(x : int)
Therefore, one would expect to annotate the return type as,
foo(x : int) : string
Since the pattern is showing foo applied to x. The Rust syntax is actually confusing for both Haskell/ML programmers (where the arrow comes from) and mainstream programmers. It's too small an issue to change now though.
Rust's support for proper "algebraic data types" is very good and gives it an advantage over languages like C++. However there are some small surprises, such as forcing all enum constructors/fields to be public (one must therefore wrap it to make an abstract data type).
Every language has its warts and these are particularly minor ones.
So now companies make billions off of the software written in Rust and has even one student become a millionaire? Companies that appropriate such projects should start paying their fair share to people who made it possible for them to make such profits.