Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
1–10 of 64 posts
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#2Written in Rust and yet when I downloaded it — admittedly a few months ago now — it segfaulted within a minute of me opening it for the first time.
0/10, not inclined to try again.
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#3I don’t see a debian package.
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#4Written in Rust and yet when I downloaded it — admittedly a few months ago now — it segfaulted within a minute of me opening it for the first time. 0/10, not inclined to try again.
People who think the programming language magically makes bugs disappear don't know what they're talking about.
Yes, Rust makes a few categories of bugs disappear, but there's a vast number of bugs that you can still easily create even using Rust with all linters you can find enabled... just saw on another thread someone complaining a Gemini (poor man's internet) server responded with a Rust panic coming from an `unwrap()` call :D
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#5Written in Rust and yet when I downloaded it — admittedly a few months ago now — it segfaulted within a minute of me opening it for the first time. 0/10, not inclined to try again.
People who think the programming language magically makes bugs disappear don't know what they're talking about. Yes, Rust makes a few categories of bugs disappear, but there's a vast number of bugs that you can still easily create even using Rust with all linters you can find enabled... just saw on another thread someone complaining a Gemini (poor man's internet) server responded with a Rust panic coming from an `unw…
Hot Take: Rust Panic's are about as bad as Sig11s from the C world. I don't get good debug information in the typical case - and library authors get to decide when my program crashes (which I disagree with).
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who think the programming language magically makes bugs disappear don't know what they're talking about. Yes, Rust makes a few categories of bugs disappear, but there's a vast number of bugs that you can still easily create even using Rust with all linters you can find enabled... just saw on another thread someone complaining a Gemini (poor man's internet) server responded with a Rust panic coming from an `unw…
Hot Take: Rust Panic's are about as bad as Sig11s from the C world. I don't get good debug information in the typical case - and library authors get to decide when my program crashes (which I disagree with).
Definitely a "hot take".
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who think the programming language magically makes bugs disappear don't know what they're talking about. Yes, Rust makes a few categories of bugs disappear, but there's a vast number of bugs that you can still easily create even using Rust with all linters you can find enabled... just saw on another thread someone complaining a Gemini (poor man's internet) server responded with a Rust panic coming from an `unw…
Hot Take: Rust Panic's are about as bad as Sig11s from the C world. I don't get good debug information in the typical case - and library authors get to decide when my program crashes (which I disagree with).
On a tangent — for a numeric library, would you rather NaN or throw? I find a fair amount of division over this question, but people lean towards throw over NaN.
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#8Written in Rust and yet when I downloaded it — admittedly a few months ago now — it segfaulted within a minute of me opening it for the first time. 0/10, not inclined to try again.
People who think the programming language magically makes bugs disappear don't know what they're talking about. Yes, Rust makes a few categories of bugs disappear, but there's a vast number of bugs that you can still easily create even using Rust with all linters you can find enabled... just saw on another thread someone complaining a Gemini (poor man's internet) server responded with a Rust panic coming from an `unw…
Well if you're not using unsafe, you would expect zero segfaults when using rust, no? Though I imagine it's impossible for anything with graphics to avoid unsafe code entirely.
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who think the programming language magically makes bugs disappear don't know what they're talking about. Yes, Rust makes a few categories of bugs disappear, but there's a vast number of bugs that you can still easily create even using Rust with all linters you can find enabled... just saw on another thread someone complaining a Gemini (poor man's internet) server responded with a Rust panic coming from an `unw…
Hot Take: Rust Panic's are about as bad as Sig11s from the C world. I don't get good debug information in the typical case - and library authors get to decide when my program crashes (which I disagree with).
You're not supposed to be afraid of segfaults, you're supposed to be afraid of the incorrect memory accesses that don't get caught by segfaults.
Re: Lapce: Fast and Powerful Code Editor Written in Rust
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hot Take: Rust Panic's are about as bad as Sig11s from the C world. I don't get good debug information in the typical case - and library authors get to decide when my program crashes (which I disagree with).
On a tangent — for a numeric library, would you rather NaN or throw? I find a fair amount of division over this question, but people lean towards throw over NaN.
If the operation can fail, that should really be represented in the type, right?