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

You can't do that because I hate you

bvisness.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 216 posts

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#141

Post by shepherdjerred »

LoganDark wrote: post #125
shepherdjerred wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but is still unstable due to being "newly added". Where did you get this from? The tracking issue says nothing of the sort: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61695

> Where did you get this from? The source code? #[unstable(feature = "unwrap_infallible", reason = "newly added", issue = "61695")] And that issue you linked is from 2019 and full of people asking when it will be stabilized. Last activity was in late 2021.

That annotation hasn't been touched (aside from being moved around) since it was authored [0].

Your comment said:

> `Result::into_ok`, which was introduced in 2019, but is still unstable due to being "newly added".

Your comment makes it sound that the Rust team considers a four year old utility method as "newly added", and that's the reason why this method is marked as unstable. More likely, this "newly added" reason is something they add for any new unstable feature, and it is now out of date.

Considering that repository has 9,000 open issues, and 50,0000 total issues, you can imagine that this issue has simply not been prioritized. Rust being poor at prioritizing, handling issues, etc. is a totally separate discussion from "Rust thinks four year old code is new"

[0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/c784720f3a2d0b66142...

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#142

Post by LoganDark »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #141
LoganDark wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where did you get this from? The source code? #[unstable(feature = "unwrap_infallible", reason = "newly added", issue = "61695")] And that issue you linked is from 2019 and full of people asking when it will be stabilized. Last activity was in late 2021.

That annotation hasn't been touched (aside from being moved around) since it was authored [0]. Your comment said: > `Result::into_ok`, which was introduced in 2019, but is still unstable due to being "newly added". Your comment makes it sound that the Rust team considers a four year old utility method as "newly added", and that's the reason why this method is marked as unstable. More likely, this "newly added" reason…

There's nothing wrong with their prioritization, there are tons and tons of high-priority issues that deserve more contributor time than this. Everyone's a volunteer.

This is just a process error, IMHO. The process for stabilization in general just results in outliers like this and it's really frustrating for everyone involved. I know Rust is sort of unique here, just like it's unique in all sorts of other ways, but I can't help but think that there could have been some sort of provision for small methods like these.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#143

Post by pdimitar »

ender341341 wrote: post #53
TheCoreh wrote: post #14

The unstable warning preventing you from wrapping the comments actually seems pretty reasonable to me. It is implemented, but there are probably edge cases where the proper way to wrap and retain the best possible formatting is still disputed. Since a lot of people format on save, via commit hooks or during CI, having this feature enabled as stable and _changing the behavior later_ would cause massive annoying diffs…

other posts pointed out the issue, it breaks certain markdown formatted comments (mainly tables).

It would be very valuable if that was part of the tool's explanation then.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#144

Post by anonymousab »

gizmo wrote: post #102
bryanlarsen wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really appreciate the way Rust feature gates unstable features. It's easy to opt into nightly if you need them, it's nice that new features are iterated until they are correct and it is nice to rely on stable being stable.

You can just prefix features with --experimental so people can use their own judgement. Software should warn users when they do something that might harm them. But it shouldn't patronizingly refuse to run. "I'm sorry bryanlarsen, I'm afraid I can't do that." - 2023 a rustfmt Odyssey.

Is the code actually there on non-nightly builds or is it just a simple text response for the experimental flag?

For the former then sure, it should just let you do the thing and simply fail loudly if it fails. For the latter, there's not much they can really do without switching you over to nightly rust.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#145

Post by chii »

arp242 wrote: post #132
avalys wrote: post #101

I have a similar pet peeve in software, what I refer to as ‘Don’t Suck’ Buttons. A ‘Don’t Suck’ Button is a setting, turned off by default and usually hidden in a corner of the UI or configuration file, which fixes a common issue that new users experience, and/or turns on the behavior that everyone wants from the product in the first place. The best examples of ‘Don’t Suck’ Buttons involve settings with no obvious di…

> then became universally relied upon but somehow never enabled by default. Often it's not that universal; especially for older software there's a lot of variety in how people use it, and changing defaults can be hugely confusing for existing users. A lot of these (alleged) "don't suck" buttons are probably more subjective than you might think. The HDMI thing may be a security-related, or maybe there are is another r…

This is the chesterton's fence. Don't remove the barrier until you understood why the barrier was there first.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#146

Post by interstice »

I have run into this with JavaScript, Shopify and numerous applications. Usually it’s because an internal ideology or future plan js incompatible with a currently working featured. It’s mildly annoying when there is no recommended replacement. It’s very annoying when there are a bunch of suggested alternatives that don’t work. The worst is when the attitude is “you shouldn’t be trying to do it this way in the first place” when there really is no good alternative.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#147

Post by smrq »

flimsypremise wrote: post #49
shepherdjerred wrote: post #42

The author provides very surface-level criticism of two Rust tools , but they don't look into why those choices were made. I'm ignoring the Python complaint since it's discussed in other comments. With about five minutes of my time, I found out: wrap_comments was introduced in 2019 [0]. There are bugs in the implementation (it breaks Markdown tables), so the option hasn't been marked as stable. Progress on the issue…

5 years to get a wrap_comments feature stable? I sometime wonder if people read the things they write?

I don't know if this is hard in their codebase (although I have a guess), but I have worked on a code formatter before and easy-sounding things were often an unimaginable nightmare.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#148

Post by laidoffamazon »

I like these examples, particularly in the Rust ecosystem because they mirror my frustration with Rust exactly - code examples fail in embedded documentation because of nightly channel differences, libraries that assume dependency on one stdlib or another, it's a massive cognitive load on top of the already obvious load of the borrow checker.

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#149

Post by ido »

MetaMonk wrote: post #116
avalys wrote: post #101

I have a similar pet peeve in software, what I refer to as ‘Don’t Suck’ Buttons. A ‘Don’t Suck’ Button is a setting, turned off by default and usually hidden in a corner of the UI or configuration file, which fixes a common issue that new users experience, and/or turns on the behavior that everyone wants from the product in the first place. The best examples of ‘Don’t Suck’ Buttons involve settings with no obvious di…

At In-n-Out, you have to say a magic chant to have them make the food taste better (and even then it still tastes bad).

What’s the magic chant?

Re: You can't do that because I hate you

#150

Post by MonaroVXR »

avalys wrote: post #101

I have a similar pet peeve in software, what I refer to as ‘Don’t Suck’ Buttons. A ‘Don’t Suck’ Button is a setting, turned off by default and usually hidden in a corner of the UI or configuration file, which fixes a common issue that new users experience, and/or turns on the behavior that everyone wants from the product in the first place. The best examples of ‘Don’t Suck’ Buttons involve settings with no obvious di…

Literally my acting stupid and turning this setting on...

I turn the ps5 off and the TV off and the PS4 Pro starts and turns on my tv

Post reply on HN