The only reason why software didn't have telemetry before was because software engineering was in a less mature state. Being against software that has telemetry just shows you would like to use software using substandard engineering processes.
Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
61–70 of 324 posts
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#62the article seems to be mainly about Go, but iirc Amazon now employs most of the Rust steering committee, so much so that there was an ex contributor complaining about it a while ago.
Java used to be backed by Sun Microsystems, but now it's really open source. Nowadays (iirc) Oracle and Red Hat are the main contributors.
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
My problem with Odin is the same as Zig. I think that manual memory management is a bad choice for most applications and only really has a place in very low-level or performance-critical code. To me, the most promising newer languages all attempt to make automatic memory management faster, more predictable, and more scalable. That’s what I think is so compelling about Rust. Koka is a promising upcoming language as we…
Outside of Rc and Arc, which part of Rust memory management is automatic? The whole pitch for Rust is making manual safety management safer by using more sophisticated compile time checks. It certainly doesn't make automatic memory management faster or more scalable. (Rc and Arc are both regressions from tracing GC in that regard.)
The whole ownership and borrowing system is a type of automatic memory management. It just happens at compile time instead of runtime like most automatic memory management systems.
Manual memory management is possible in Rust, but is not typically something developers need to interact with. There is typically no need to manually free objects when you are done with them. You just let the system destroy the objects automatically when they go out of scope.
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#64I was unpleasantly surprised when I installed Dart last weekend and received a warning about it reporting back to Google Analytics by default(?!), so I can definitely sympathize with the concern.
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#65Alternatively: "Stop complaining no one eats their vegetables and make a vegetable that people want to eat."
People don't know what they want to eat until aggressive marketing convinces them to have a taste.
Yeah? I guess Big Garlic Bread is out there somewhere twisting their mustaches and watching the dollars roll in.
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#66I don't think I understand the ask here. Author's claim is they're concerned about corporate ownership of the languages but the examples they cite of concrete issues is the system "phones home." Well, so does Python every time I pull a pip package in. So does every package manager.
Is there an implied "I don't trust the phone-home features of package management systems supported by corporations" that doesn't apply to non-corporate-supported development ecosystems? Why is that?
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#67postulate: languages that provide the most utility are more likely to be controlled by corporate interests because corporations that depend on those languages have a stake in its future and will invest in it. this includes web standards, openGL, and basically anything with a governing board composed of multiple large entities.
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
These Microsoft examples are 20 years old. The company has changed leadership to a team that embraces open source years ago and I think they've done a pretty good job demonstrating this embrace. They have adopted open source Java, they further open sourced .NET, they've embraced Linux containers in Azure and WSL on windows, etc. Might be about time to reconsider this perspective of 'hate Microsoft'. Full disclosure:…
I'm not sure I believe this. IME, the developer experience of .NET on Linux and Mac platforms is definitely subpar compared to Windows. I've tried to get started on F# several times and have always run into bugs and incomplete/inadequate documentation.
I exclusively do dotnet on macos and I consider the experience to be mostly superior
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#69"GCC, in turn, allowed the development of new languages like Perl and python"
wut?
Re: Stop Building on Corporate-Controlled Languages
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
These Microsoft examples are 20 years old. The company has changed leadership to a team that embraces open source years ago and I think they've done a pretty good job demonstrating this embrace. They have adopted open source Java, they further open sourced .NET, they've embraced Linux containers in Azure and WSL on windows, etc. Might be about time to reconsider this perspective of 'hate Microsoft'. Full disclosure:…
> changed leadership to a team that embraces open source years ago Before or after they were shaking down Android OEMs over FAT? Microsoft didn't change, they're just operating in a market where they can't get away with as much.
> Before or after they were shaking down Android OEMs over FAT?
Looks like that was 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table#Challeng...
Nadella started in 2014.