71–80 of 102 posts
Anyone got other useful tools for debugging within (neo)vim? Just seamlessly putting down breakpoints, stepping through code execution, and getting a fully fledged debugging UI experience (a la Visual Studio or Remedy BG)? This is possibly the only thing I miss from developing on Windows, and it's a shame! EDIT: I specified 'within vim' but actually I'd be down for standalone Linux app recommendations too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the sake of the argument, let's imagine that you fork rust. You'd have to come up with another name for it right? But since the name it's the only thing that is getting in the way with this new (draft) policy, you wouldn't really have to fork the language and the tooling etc. All you have to do is to just use this new made up name in place of rust (and similarly for cargo) and you've achieved independence with a…
Cr st contains the word R st, which is illegal so you can't do that.
Does this setup have nice visualizations of data structures? Can it show a Vec as a list of values or a HashMap as a list of (key,value)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is unproductive. I have significant criticisms of the policy draft, but this is not helpful.
In the original tweet, they say: > we invite you to review (..) and share any feedback (...). Your responses will help us ensure the Rust Trademark Policy is useful for all! I'm bringing attention and visibility to the proposal and hopefully help the foundation receive valuable feedback from more people.
This just diverts attention away from the original project that was posted here.
Are you going to post the same thing under every project written in Rust during the next weeks?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I started watching [3]. I have no stakes in this, but a lot of stuff I should be enraged about... I'm just not? Doesn't look fundamentally different to Debian or Firefox trademark policies. I guess it is an abrupt change in trademark enforcement for Rust.
Just ignoring that it is fundamentally gross and pointless, which some people don't understand somehow, consider the practical implications. I can't casually make a youtube video or blog article teaching about Rust without worrying about trademarks if I use the word. Hundreds of rust libraries have Rust in the name and would be in violation of this policy the second it changed, etc.
Crabby may be the word to use
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just hope Rust won't end up being forked tho. We had such an amazing community around it...
For the sake of the argument, let's imagine that you fork rust. You'd have to come up with another name for it right? But since the name it's the only thing that is getting in the way with this new (draft) policy, you wouldn't really have to fork the language and the tooling etc. All you have to do is to just use this new made up name in place of rust (and similarly for cargo) and you've achieved independence with a…
Fork the web page, you cannot just replace Rust with ALTERNATIVE, because ALTERNATIVE is not used at npm, you don't have a Discord community, and you don't have books and videos, and no foundation. All those changes would need to be kept up-to-date.
You could also have a new file type, .altrs, while you still want to be able to use Rust's files. Same goes for tooling, supporting websites such as crates.io: you might want your own, but you also want all the tools to work with the Rust crates. With the new file type, you need people to know how to change their config to treat .altrs files as regular .rs files.
.. though I don't know how much of it would be really necessary if all you want is to not violate their new policy, so it's more of a thought experiment at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I started watching [3]. I have no stakes in this, but a lot of stuff I should be enraged about... I'm just not? Doesn't look fundamentally different to Debian or Firefox trademark policies. I guess it is an abrupt change in trademark enforcement for Rust.
Yeah, it's such a weird outrage. I went and compared it to the node foundation one and its very similar. Some of the other issues he has are kind of deranged. I'm glad the Foundation want Rust meetups to be firearm free. Good Lord. Is that really worth getting so upset about? I've got a couple small things I don't like, but once again, it seems to be right in line with other open source trademark policies. I just had…
I strongly, STRONGLY, agree with their political stance. However, I find their forcing their politics down people's throats extremely concerning. Keep in mind that you also have to seek approval to use the word Rust (I am not affiliated with the Rust Foundation), which means that they could disallow it merely because they don't like you or what you stand for (which the prior rule shows a tendency to do). Call me crazy, but I fail to see how that's in any way progressive (yes, given even the tolerance paradox) - especially given that the other people and beliefs will be running the Rust Foundation at some point in the future.
This isn't a matter of "keep your politics out of tech," it's a matter of bringing in politics being actually harmful to the community.
Ending gun violence in America is the responsibility of voters and lawmakers, not the Rust Foundation.
[flagged]