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

Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 162 posts

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#41

Post by drtgh »

tkubacki wrote: post #7
jraph wrote: post #2

The explanation: > I regret to inform the community that since my house was destroyed by russians who invaded my country, Wasm3 will enter a minimal maintenance phase. At this time, I am unable to continue the development of new features. However, I am committed to keeping the project alive and will actively review and merge incoming Pull Requests. I deeply appreciate your understanding and support during this diffic…

I really hoped someone will help get rid of Putin from inside RU by this moment (I believe there are plenty of who may not necessary love him). EU should really put more cash on table to help UA.

There is an epidemic of people dying inside RU after criticizing Putin, the closer the circle of "business" the more notorious the fall through a window. The rest goes to prison under false accusations when they are public figures; this is the problem of not to have separated the political power from judicial power, among other things.

Those business also makes me to think that the next one is not going to be better. Anyway, the hope should never lost, life is full of twists and turns.

PS: I don't have Russian friends so my opinion is just based on what I see externally.

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#43

Post by knorker »

matvore wrote: post #10
Jyaif wrote: post #5

[flagged]

Don't worry, we enjoy that kind of stuff. I usually put all the resource freeing at the end of a function under a goto label, or only a few lines within the allocation, so it's easy to visually confirm everything is cleaned up. The way this commit frees the resources inside of if blocks is not how I would have done it. And if I find I let a leak in the code I usually refactor to make the correctness more obvious. In…

> it's easy to visually confirm everything is cleaned up.

Yes and no.

It's easy to not make a mistake in a function. It's basically impossible to not make this mistake in 1'000 functions.

Especially as code evolves over time, being 99% perfect about this, or even 99.9% perfect, is just not good enough. Not nearly enough.

And this reminds me of something Schneier said, that everyone can make a cryptographic algorithm that they themselves cannot break. That even as a professional, having your algorithm broken is not even embarrassing.

Similarly, very good coders are not even embarrassed when they fail at memory management. People may be better or worse at it, but even the best of us are terrible at it.

I once knew a very good coder who bragged about how apparently he's the only one able to write code that's not buggy like this.

To prove a point, I spent an hour reading his opensource project and found several resource leaks, at least one of which was remotely triggerable.

It's easy to do it right once, usually, but no these mistakes happen all the time.

> if I find [… typo words(?) omitted … ] a leak in the code I usually refactor to make the correctness more obvious.

This seems to contradict that it was easy to avoid in the first place. Yes, refactor can help. But there's a bit of learned helplessness, in that this is actually the language's fault, and it doesn't have to be that way.

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#45

Post by dralley »

user3939382 wrote: post #28
ranting-moth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is awful. Slava Ukraini.

[flagged]

If you had lived under Stalin for 15 years and directly experienced 4 million of your countrymen being starved to death under his dictats, the concept of "good" side and "bad" side is messy. Especially when you don't have full access to information - no internet, no newspapers, no radio.

The Finns fought on the "bad" side as well, due to the Soviet Union having tried to invade them already two years previously. Ukraine had likewise tried to get independence in 1917 which led to a 4 year civil war which they unfortunately lost.

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#47

Post by usrusr »

pjc50 wrote: post #31
ekianjo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Better than letting them get killed for loss of territory.

Or, if they trade safety for foreign rule, getting killed in the next Russian war of expansion where undoubtedly citizens from formerly Ukrainian territories would be the first sent into the "who needs tactics if you have numbers" assaults. They don't have a non-violent option, no matter the sacrifices they'd be willing to make.

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#48

Post by syrusakbary »

I'm sad to hear this to be honest. Wasm3 is (was?) an awesome Wasm interpreter that was ahead of the rest in terms of performance (about 3-5x slower than native, and about 3x faster than the typical Wasm interpreters).

I hope Volodymyr the best as he tries he keep things afloat with the Russia invasion in Ukraine. Hope the war will be soon behind us.

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#49

Post by smallstepforman »

tkubacki wrote: post #7
jraph wrote: post #2

The explanation: > I regret to inform the community that since my house was destroyed by russians who invaded my country, Wasm3 will enter a minimal maintenance phase. At this time, I am unable to continue the development of new features. However, I am committed to keeping the project alive and will actively review and merge incoming Pull Requests. I deeply appreciate your understanding and support during this diffic…

I really hoped someone will help get rid of Putin from inside RU by this moment (I believe there are plenty of who may not necessary love him). EU should really put more cash on table to help UA.

[flagged]

Re: Wasm3 entering a minimal maintenance phase

#50

Post by knorker »

pjmlp wrote: post #40
knorker wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C++20 improves the situation, though. https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/format/format But yes, in a world where Rust exists, I don't see a need for C or C++ for greenfield.

There are plenty of greenfield use cases where Rust will need to bind to existing C and C++ libraries.

I guess the field I was imagining was greener than that. But yes.

In many cases you can just interface to the C libraries. But cross language coding has never been perfect, and yes, sometimes it's better to continue using the same language.

It's not hard to write an RAII wrapper around a C library, and the careful allocate/free is code you have to write either way (e.g. I'd write a wrapper in C++ if I need to use a C library with resource handling).

C is the easiest to interface with. Every language has to be C-compatible.

I would not choose C or C++ just because I depend on libfftw, or simdjson, or most other things. If the code that needs to talk to the library is less than 10% of the total program (exact percentage just made up), then I'd still use Rust.

Post reply on HN