"No way to prevent this" say users of only language where this regularly happens

Post by komali2 » Wed, May 22, 2024, 8:50 AM UTC

Xeamek wrote: post #82

eterevsky wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately you have to pick 2 out of: - Lack of restrictions - Safety - Performance If you choose safety and no restriction, you pay the price in performance (for GC etc.)

Again, restrictions that are forced you for a price of safety are one thing. But what I'm complaining about are restrictions that don't have to be there to get borrowchecker working, but rather are there because designers arbitrary decided "it's better this way".

Post by llm_trw » Wed, May 22, 2024, 8:51 AM UTC

xena wrote: post #55

darkwater wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Furries are NSFW because they look cartoonish and "unprofessional"? I don't like them but what a boring workplace would that be.

They're being satirical. People usually berate my posts because I have cartoon characters for Socratic exchanges to teach people things like Kubernetes, claiming that is "unprofessional" or something. These people are sarcastically berating my post for NOT using that Socratic system.

Post by scotty79 » Wed, May 22, 2024, 8:52 AM UTC

Xeamek wrote: post #64

pdimitar wrote: post #53

I've been doing programming for ~31 years in total and ~22 years professionally and at this point I have lost all hope that programmers at large will ever gain these mythic qualities called "self-reflection" and "introspection". Truth is, these people are simply afraid for their cozy jobs, that's all there is to it. Derivative states of mind like Stockholm Syndrome and Sunk Cost Fallacy are quite normal to appear in…

Eh, Rust would be fine if not for the fact that it's too opinionated. Unfortunately you can't just have Rust's safety checks, without opting into restrictions that Rust designers force onto You that aren't inherent to safety checks, but more because 'that's a better practice (according to us)'. And also, easy and fast iteration just isn't there, both because of borrow checker restrictions and compile times

Post by Xeamek » Wed, May 22, 2024, 8:53 AM UTC

pdimitar wrote: post #88

Xeamek wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, Rust would be fine if not for the fact that it's too opinionated. Unfortunately you can't just have Rust's safety checks, without opting into restrictions that Rust designers force onto You that aren't inherent to safety checks, but more because 'that's a better practice (according to us)'. And also, easy and fast iteration just isn't there, both because of borrow checker restrictions and compile times

C/C++ being non-opinionated is the main source of the security vulnerabilities. Let's face it, it felt good to be a lone cowboy carrying a lot of responsibility and knowing what you are doing. I was there myself and I'll admit the ego trip was awesome. These times are long past and naturally, people refuse to adapt. > Unfortunately you can't just have Rust's safety checks, without opting into restrictions that Rust d…

Post by pdimitar » Wed, May 22, 2024, 8:55 AM UTC

Xeamek wrote: post #97

pdimitar wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C/C++ being non-opinionated is the main source of the security vulnerabilities. Let's face it, it felt good to be a lone cowboy carrying a lot of responsibility and knowing what you are doing. I was there myself and I'll admit the ego trip was awesome. These times are long past and naturally, people refuse to adapt. > Unfortunately you can't just have Rust's safety checks, without opting into restrictions that Rust d…

There are restrictions out on You by the borrow checker to ensure safety, and then there are restrictions put on You by rust design team 'just because'. Again, the former are fine, it's the latter I have a problem with.