561–570 of 757 posts
Yikes, the majority of this blog post is saying basically "skill issue" and "Jarred bad engineer", but I think that hurts Zig far more than Andrew realises. If Bun, a disaster of engineering apparently, simply just switches to Rust and all of their issues magically disappear... then the Rust Vs Zig war is over before it started right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And I am sorry, but adoption and reaching critical mass is an important part of a serious programming language. Would you argue that Chez Scheme (to pick a random example) isn't a "serious programming language"? And I am sorry, but the assumption that "explosive growth" in the venture capital sense is somehow necessary for "success" is cancer.
> Would you argue that Chez Scheme (to pick a random example) isn't a "serious programming language"? Commercially speaking? Absolutely not a "serious programming language" in this context. If someone tries to implement a project using Chez Scheme, they better have agreat reason to not use mainstream boring language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linus attacked bad software, Andrew attacks the Thiel Fellowship, VC Foundings, and AI. There's little or no Linus there, pointing fingers at, and even when he does, he points at code he neither uses nor maintains. Linus don't give a shit about other people projects and businesses.
> Linus attacked bad software "Nvidia, fuck you!" [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4SWxWIOVBM
Not to mention he was attacking an opaque corporation, not a single person like this blog post does.
So is this guy going to dress down any project that decides to move off of Zig? If Mitchell Hashimoto decides to move Ghostty off of Zig to C or Rust will we get a scathing blog post about that too?
This is unprofessional and embarrassing for Zig. I know very little about Jared but his article yesterday, which I read, seemed appreciative of Zig. I now learn he's donated significant chunks of money to them. This entire article is publicly and personally attacking him for choosing a different product. It's insane to me that Andrew thinks this post will somehow exonerate Zig when it really just makes them look chil…
I don't think it's an attack, more like a goodbye. Andrew is happy bun is not zig anymore because it was not up to the level they would expect from a project that represents them.
The post disclaims the ambassador relationship, but treats Bun as having all of the responsibility of being an ambassador anyway. If Bun is in Zig's house, like the monthly meetings and the core team code review suggest, then somehow the outcome reflects on Zig. If not, then that's fine, but then it begins and ends at "They were a project written in Zig, and now they're not". He can't have both "It's their fault because their code was slop" and "it's not my business".
Jared seems like the typical SV tech bro who deserves this type of personal disrespect, but of course 90% of people on this site would love to him and wouldn’t understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are writing in C-like codebase and aren't tracking lifetimes and ownership at least as well as a borrow checker you're opening yourself to CVEs.
The concept of lifetimes was invented long before Rust borrow checker was even "scratched on paper." Of course, people who understand what they are they doing have known about these concepts for decades and have built their architectures around them. However, Rust borrow checker is much stricter than that. You have to build your architecture around the fact that you can't have more than one mutable reference at a tim…
I'm saying you have to be as meticulous as a borrow checker. Not as strict, of course, but you have to analyze each pointer, how and when it's used, and then cross-reference with the documented lifetime.
Just like thread safety existed before Rust made it explicit. Now you don't need to investigate if data is thread safe if it's `Send + Sync`.
This is a job humans suck at and compilers excel at. With some caveats. There will be edge cases that will need to be manually proven.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have to if you give a shit about the community you are leading, yes. You're not operating as a private figure in that role, everything you do affects the community and it is blind or selfish to act otherwise.
This is so deeply wrong . This person owes you nothing . You're accusing them of "selfishness" after they've given away thousands of hours of their time... Your entitlement is just breathtaking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"No one else cares about someone being discriminatory towards people with autism". Okay bro. Yes the reason I posted that comment was to be performative for a 2018 tech twitter audience. Grow up and have some empathy instead of being antisocial on an internet forum