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

Why I Left Rust

jntrnr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 880 posts

Re: Why I Left Rust

#291

Post by jakear »

josephg wrote: post #188
jakear wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How ironic that Rust should have the most problems arising as a result of shared ownership. Perhaps they should consider a model where the entity has a single logical owner and requests to change its state are made by passing messages to that owner…

I don't think its ironic. Its just that a shared ownership model is more complex than having a single person in charge, making decisions. And its a reasonably new idea - not many of us have the experience and skills we need to make it work. Inevitably, more mistakes happen. In many ways its sort of incredible and impressive how well rust functions. There's probably hundreds of people involved, from core compiler tool…

You understand a central tenant of Rust is forbidding shared ownership?

Re: Why I Left Rust

#292

Post by BizarreByte »

rowanG077 wrote: post #269
zozbot234 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a dog whistle. What the OP is actually saying is that he's extremely angry and pissed off that this was allowed to happen, and he's noping out for that eminently understandable reason. But if he said that in no uncertain terms (as a European very well might in similar circumstances!) he might fall afoul of the official Code of Conduct for being aggressive and threatening towards other contributors. Hence this we…

So why not just say that. All this dog whistle talk is extremely immature and unprofessional.

Because this is what happens when you try to restrict not only speech, but how community members even express themselves for fear someone might be hurt or offended.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#293

Post by wyldfire »

I wonder if Rust would be better off with a BDFL. It sounds like the antithesis of some of the governing goals that were established but perhaps it would deliver some consistency.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#294

Post by Roark66 »

I was with you until this part: >It was JeanHeyd who called Rust out for having no Black representation among Rust conference speakers. Rightly so, as both the Rust organization and the conferences had little to no Black representation.

Am I the only one that considers such arbitrary "diversity enforcement policy" horribly racist?

No organisation should be "called out for a lack of - insert-race-here- representation unless that organisation is in fact discriminatory. No one should be discouraged, relegated, skipped for mentoring or removed from a membership or a leadership role in an organisation because that person is the wrong race. Regardless of the reason why you feel that race is wrong. Calling out a group "for lack of Black representation" is basically telling every single non-Black member of that group they are less valuable because of the color of their skin.

People are not exchangeable units whose defining feature is the color of their skin. How can intelligent people not see this kind of thinking leads to the worst of social divisions?

Personally, I was with the author until that quote. If I was a member of that organisation I too would not be OK being represented by a person that makes such horribly offensive personal opinions known regardless of their technical expertise.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#295

Post by JyB »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #194
chillbill wrote: post #79

I haven't seen anyone bring this up, so I will. I read through the original blog post from JeanHeyd[1] and in no way do they mention anything related to being a person of color, why then does JT associate it with that? I have no idea about the inner workings of the rust leadership team and who they are even, but from the timeline described and from the original post, there's nothing the could be related to that. Jean…

"White" is rather emphatically not like other ethnic or racial labels. Throughout the history of the US, who counts as "white" has been redefined many times to suit the political goals of the people at the time. In the era of the founding fathers, the Irish, Spaniards, Italians, all considered not white. Then during various times, often driving by waves of immigration of some other ethnicity people were freaking out…

Not sure what that has to do with how, in today's US society, the 'White' vs 'PoC' labels and paradigm is used by an extremely divisive and toxic 'Us vs Them' mentality. Even when completely off-topic. Which the parent was making an obvious allusion to. The fact that you even dared to threaten him with gross insinuations says a lot about you, or more broadly about the US in general.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#297

Post by jmyeet »

junon wrote: post #77

Wait. Let me get this straight. Someone is an expert in this field. They're asked to speak at RustConf after a leadership vote. They've also written an article about reflection in Rust - a purely technical thing that is already pretty widely disliked conceptually. (EDIT: the talk was about this, but it's also compile time reflection and came with the usual disclaimer that it was not representative of any of the Rust…

I'm reminded of Sayre's Law [1]:

> Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.

Conference speakers is the definition of low stakes rife for pointless politicking.

I honestly don't understand why the Rust compiler reflection tech talk was the slightest bit controversial. Even if no one is in favor of the proposal, it can still be an interesting thought experiment. Such issues may expose design issues.

I agree with other commenters: anyone who is prone to playing politics with these low stakes issues needs to be pruned before they do real damage.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre%27s_law

Re: Why I Left Rust

#298

Post by jemmyw »

mhd wrote: post #181
oytis wrote: post #143

As someone who doesn't follow very closely, the amount of drama around Rust seems to be something unseen among open source projects before. Is it that BDFL-based governance just works better, or do people have higher expectations from Rust community than from, say, Linux one?

Ruby's Matz counts as a BFDL, does he? Because there was plenty of drama in that area...

Not for a long time. I think the drama queens might have moved on to another language.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#300

Post by vector_spaces »

parabyl wrote: post #128
chillbill wrote: post #79

I haven't seen anyone bring this up, so I will. I read through the original blog post from JeanHeyd[1] and in no way do they mention anything related to being a person of color, why then does JT associate it with that? I have no idea about the inner workings of the rust leadership team and who they are even, but from the timeline described and from the original post, there's nothing the could be related to that. Jean…

I think moreso than specifically meaning JeanHeyd was target as such due to race, the implication was rather that since JeanHeyd had previously raised that the lack of diveristy in speakers at the conf. was an issue, some members voting on this may have held onto that. But, it's ironic (and sad) that the same person who raised the issue of diversity in speakers - who would have been the first PoC doing a keynote - wa…

There are a few reasons that people prefer the term nonwhite over POC in certain contexts, and I think most people using it are using it intentionally because of them. The main issue is that the latter term is homogenizing:

> Political scientist Angelo Falcón argues that the use of broad terms like "person of color" is offensive because it aggregates diverse communities and projects "a false unity" that "obscure[s] the needs of Latinos and Asians".[39][40]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_color

Another criticism I've heard is that the terminology for POC originated among black activists during the civil rights movement in the US who were reclaiming the term "colored" used in the Jim Crow/segregation era, and so it's only really appropriate for black people to use.

The former term (nonwhite) is iffy too, but sometimes it's a better descriptor

To be clear, I haven't heard many people voicing the second criticism -- I think most people using "nonwhite" subscribe to the former point of view

Post reply on HN