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

871–880 of 880 posts

Re: Why I Left Rust

#871

Post by deterministic »

croes wrote: post #420
rgbgraph wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, no kidding: https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/vxgzrl/changes_in_the... Mod response: > For all those wondering about removed comments, there was some trolling going on which was summarily removed by the mods. > Please avoid any trolling and/or drama seeking comments and remember our subreddit rules. "Trolling" on display in the archives of that thread: https://www.reveddit.com/v/rust/comments/vxgzrl/changes…

Since micro aggressions are a thing number 2 is hardly possible.

I feel offended by woke people.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#872

Post by adrianN »

snovv_crash wrote: post #869
adrianN wrote: post #854

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C++ doesn't compile that much faster than Rust.

Modern C++, I agree. C++98 is a lot faster to compile though, even the same code using the same standard library calls.

Having worked on a modestly sized C++98 codebase in the recent past, I don't think I agree. But of course it would need proper benchmarks.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#873

Post by Astie »

cashsterling wrote: post #451

This behavior is the Rust leadership team is completely juvenile. Y'all need to grow up. Disagreement in technical development is highly valuable... alternative points of view should be prized and inspected, not ostracized. Quashing alternate views and opinions is a sign of a small intellect and/or a narcissistic personality disorder. For the good of the Rust community, there needs to be some transparency on who exac…

[flagged]

Re: Why I Left Rust

#875

Post by CRConrad »

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…

From your link:

> More specifically, I was nominated by “Rust Project Leadership” (to be exact with the wording) to give a keynote

That wording is misleading. If what this “Rust Project Leadership” committee says doesn't stick but can be overridden by someone (or someones) else, then they're not actually leading anything; the overrider is.

Have these people realised yet that they're just a façade?

Re: Why I Left Rust

#876

Post by CRConrad »

rgbgraph wrote: post #398
waboremo wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure there's a real connection between the languages at least when it comes to "drama". Especially considering JavaScript is the most used language, or at least in the top 5 at this rate due to how low the entry barrier is for serious use. So purely from numbers, there's bound to be a bunch with a background in JavaScript, as with any other new language. You could have also said the same thing about Python for th…

Wow, no kidding: https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/vxgzrl/changes_in_the... Mod response: > For all those wondering about removed comments, there was some trolling going on which was summarily removed by the mods. > Please avoid any trolling and/or drama seeking comments and remember our subreddit rules. "Trolling" on display in the archives of that thread: https://www.reveddit.com/v/rust/comments/vxgzrl/changes…

From this “Graydon's reply” you linked:

> Some people, naturally, feel that the norms spelled out in the rust CoC makes them feel excluded. To which all I can say is, yes, it's true: the rust CoC focuses on behaviour, not people, but if there's a person who cannot give up those behaviours, then implicitly it excludes such a person. If someone just can't get their work done effectively or can't enjoy themselves without stalking or harassing someone, or cracking a sexist or racist joke, or getting into a flame war, or insulting their colleagues, I suggest they go enjoy the numerous other totally viable language communities.

Hm... So, if someone just can't get their work done effectively or can't enjoy themselves without going behind the backs of the whole ostensibly “Leadership” group, what then? Has that person been ostracized yet? Have they even been named?!? (I sure ain't seen no sign of it.) If not, why not? There seems to be a hyuuuge amount of effort being expended to spare that person's feelings...

Which seems a) misdirected AF, and b) all too typical of these “governance by namby-pambyism” CoC committee organisations that everything on the Internet appears to have turned into in the last half-decade or so.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#877

Post by CRConrad »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #775
rubyn00bie wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have also been on the opposite side of this: I've been a member of groups whose goals I did not agree with. And no amount of civility or communication would bridge that chasm; therefore my opinions and thoughts were excluded (and I voluntarily left). What if you couldn’t leave? Perhaps the cost of leaving is too high, or you’re required to for a job. Membership in many groups isn’t even a direct action, it’s a by…

Seriously? You encountered Nazis in functional programming fora? Like, more than in your typical programming fora? (Any at all is more than I've met, but then I never socialize much.)

Maybe they meant “Functional Programming Nazis” like in “Grammar Nazis”; i.e. not actual Nazi Nazis.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#878

Post by CRConrad »

atoav wrote: post #836
rtpg wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this specific instance, there was a vote to have this keynote. Then somebody seems to have circumvented this process to get the keynote downgraded (leading to the OP resigning, as they had been behind the initial vote!) There was somebody who circumvented the intended governance structures to make this happen, and this is probably where the frustration and this blog post come from.

Okay that is a tad bit more problematic, but I still think it is not that dramatic of a thing, especially without hearing the reasoning of the organizers. They could (or should) have been more transparent with communicating their reasoning, but again: Anyone who has ever organized any decently sized event knows that in the end the buck will stop with whoever has to do the actual work. And if you ask me (you probably…

> but I still think it is not that dramatic of a thing, especially without hearing the reasoning of the organizers.

You still seem to be missing the point: Which “organizers”? The ostensible “Leadership” of the project – which one would think should be the final arbiters of any such organizing – did want the guy to do the keynote. The real issue here is that the stewardship of the whole project, to put it in sophisticated technical terms, sucks if some grey eminence can undermine the official leadership just like that. Then their whole code-of-conduct, leadership-by-committee, woke-and-adapted-for-Modern-Audiences governance foofarah is just flim-flam, a sham, a lie.

That's the real issue here.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#879

Post by CRConrad »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #581
quotemstr wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've deprived a whole generation of the rhetorical tools for healthy, impersonal and professional argument. It's no wonder that they've pressed this "stylized language of emotion and abuse" into service to fill the void: it's all they know.

The previous generations didn’t exactly set a good example for healthy, impersonal and professional argument.

But still, they did create (and sometimes even use) tools that at least make it possible – tools which far too many members of the youngest generations, and their organisations, seem to have abandoned or never even knew they existed in the first place.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#880

Post by CRConrad »

auggierose wrote: post #799
nindalf wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must be fun at incident review. "The solution is to hire better engineers. Our root cause analysis shows that this should have never happened in the first place. Whoever is responsible for this needs to go."

If the incident review shows that it is due to sabotage, how would you deal with the responsible person?

And how can what they did – presenting their own decision to other organisations or levels of their own organisation as if it were the legitimate “Leadership” consensus decision – how could that be anything other than a conscious and intentional act on their part, i.e, to use your term, “sabotage”? It's not like it could somehow be an accident, is it? “Oops, I slipped and fell onto my keyboard and these somewhat coherent and grammatically correct e-mails went out”?

Of-fucking-course it was sabotage, and of course they should be fired as all hell.

Post reply on HN