Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "The Lunduke Journal" channel.

  1. Eventually I'm going to have to write my own because this is just getting out of hand. It feels like everyone is pushing me these days and I just may go over that cliff.
    2
  2.  @ruffianeo3418  First, a monolithic kernel is not a design flaw, it's a design choice. There are tradeoffs whichever way you take it, such as better integration and faster code with less memory usage that you can do with a monolithic design and can't do as well with a microkernel. Second, Linux hasn't been a purely monolithic kernel in so long I can't even remember when the switch occurred. You can load modules after the kernel is already running. You don't need to compile everything in, it's just a means of providing options generically. And there are plenty of user space drivers these days and if you use Linux on any kind of a regular basis you probably use some, probably without knowing it.
    2
  3. They'll still do it and continue to win. The people that have the power to stop them are doing nothing and all of us little people will lose.
    2
  4. They do. There are several fork projects that use Firefox as a base. IceWeasel springs to mind first and you'll have to look up an exhaustive list on your own.
    2
  5. I've seen very few projects tout being written in either C or C++ as a selling point over the past 25 years, and most that have are more recently created and intended to attract the anti-Rust programmers. Java was always a garbage, trendy language, so of course there were far too many projects that touted being written in it. Rustaceans are just the new Java users, but with a lame pun as their group identifier. That said, it almost sounds like you're confusing the language breakdown tool on GH as being something other than what it is.
    2
  6.  @justanothercomment416  Indeed, and it's why UEFI and TPM exist. They want to lock open source out of computing. Eventually we may need to develop our own chips and boards just to have a computer that we actually own instead of one they "let us use".
    2
  7.  @josephp.3341  That presumes that Rust is a good language. If you're even a little bit into language design, you'd realize it's garbage.
    2
  8.  @sniglom  Memory leaks aren't safe. So certainly it's violating memory safety to leak memory. Of course, Rust doesn't even provide memory safety because of both FFI and the fact that the compiler still has a bug with regards to lifetime management that allows lifetimes to be extended beyond the life of an object.
    2
  9.  @linuxforpunks  I don't know why anyone would want tabs anywhere else, but it'd be nice if you could customize it with some sort of built-in configuration thing. I was thinking about it the other day, but why isn't the user interface fully customizable. They could just use JavaScript to configure it and keep that in a separate VM to prevent it from being hijacked by websites, then you could write whatever code you want or drag and drop preexisting elements where you saw fit. Just imagine if the whole UI was a canvas and you had resizable, rescalable, and even reprogrammable elements to put wherever you please.
    2
  10. Why do you think that?
    2
  11.  @LinuxLightHouse  Agreed. I demand the freedom to be wrong even if I never am.
    2
  12.  @dynfoxx  Clang, LLVM is the backend.
    2
  13.  @dynfoxx  No, because you called LLVM the compiler. The backend doesn't do compilation. At most it converts IL to a final binary format, but the compilation has already been done by clang at that point.
    2
  14. I admire your optimism even if I don't share it. However, what I really want to discuss is your pronunciation of Mozilla like you're trying to say mozzarella. Is that intentional? I kind of hope it is because they deserve the insult given their politics. I'm starting to suspect that maybe the reason YouTube is only allowing me to have 360p is because of my political viewpoint and not because I'm using Firefox since I've heard from numerous others that they don't have that limitation while also using Firefox. If this is true, then some things may need to change, and I don't mean the browser I'm using, at least not yet.
    2
  15. That's because they're just intelligent enough to know not to say precisely what they mean, which is to exclude all straight, white males. It makes them more difficult to sue and next to impossible to catch in a lie because they don't lie with their mouths, but rather their actions.
    2
  16.  @gargamel3478  I assume they learned the wrong lesson from how `git` works. Of course, even if that's the case, the database is too large and there's undoubtedly far too much duplication of effort. They should be more discriminating with what goes into it and prune stuff as needed. Here they could learn something from `git` such as branching, but maybe with the branches not all being necessary locally to have a complete picture of the most recent view of the database.
    2
  17.  @Turalcar  I'm not talking about the borrow checker, though if you had problems with that for a year or two then you weren't writing good code in the first place.
    2
  18.  @mmstick  Are you claiming that none of those are also issues in Rust? Some of those can't be fully addressed even in Rust and if you think they can then you need to go back to school. Also, what do you have against operator[]? Are you objecting to the fact that you can overload it or are you disliking how it's used in various containers?
    2
  19.  @mmstick  Ah yes, pick one that's not an issue due to actual language, but library design. That could be easily remedied even in C++ by either using a different library or they could merely change the behavior of the standard library. Do you want to address the language level problems instead?
    2
  20.  @mmstick  No. What a function in a standard library does is not a flaw in the language. It's a flaw in the library design. The standard library is not the language. Also, you still haven't said what you have a problem with in regards to operator[]. Is it that you can overload it at all? Or do you have a problem with how the function works in the various points of the library where it's used? If you've got some novel third avenue of complaining about operator[], then what?
    2
  21. I'm pretty sure everyone who can verbalize their thoughts are acoustic, unless they're using an amplifier, then they're considered electronic. Of course, we get into a gray area with recordings of acoustic instruments, but I suppose as long as there's no amplifier before it's recorded it still makes sense to call it acoustic. Now this is all to say that you clearly meant to accuse him of being autistic and that's rather bigoted of you, but I expect nothing else from those that preach tolerance and acceptance.
    2
  22. This way that you feel about quantum computers, is the same way I feel about them, but also the same way I feel about AI and Rust. It's all hype and it doesn't hold up to the promise.
    2
  23. What's really wild about this story is that I've got a copy of that very sketch sitting in my video folder ready to cue up, and that is the very sketch he referenced. Instead of forking such a project, it'd be awesome if we could just replace it instead. Maybe force scientists to actually learn how to program by making them use the language that all of Python's best libraries are written in, C. Of course, even using C you can still mitigate your need to think about your code, but who's going to teach scientists those methodologies.
    2
  24. It's the hype and it not being able to live up to it. For some people, all of the lies just piss us off.
    2
  25.  @bm1259  Sure, there are many undelivered promises, and that's at the very least annoying. The community around it is exceedingly toxic. But above all else, it's just an ugly language that doesn't provide anything over above the languages which existed before it. If anything, it has an inconsistent syntax that looks worse than C++. Something I keep seeing a lot of lately is a sort of movement to use only the parts of C++ that somebody likes and finds useful while writing programs in basically the same way as C. While I think it'd be better to embrace more of the C++ style of doing things, especially if you make use of classes, it's not a method that's entirely without merit.
    2
  26.  @agazhf-g9y  Not everyone wants to use a 500mb static build and if your builds are smaller then you're not actually including everything needed to run it as I've discovered with quite a few static builds on my own system. There's always a dependency that gets left out. You might think it's worth it for one or two apps, but not everyone has a terabyte sized drive in their system, and if every app is static that adds up. Truthfully, if you were a responsible programmer, it wouldn't matter if every user had terabytes of space, that's still a lot of their space that you're wasting for your own vanity. Also, C and C++ are not the same language and have been largely incompatible without massive compromises for the better part of 25 years. So stop grouping them like they're the same.
    2
  27.  @Bokto1  Complete with animated graphics in the terminal. Only thing it needs is a selectable color scheme so we can have dark mode without modifying the code.
    2
  28. The thing I don't get, why is there so much anti-Semitism in this country now? Every time you talk about Jewish concerns there are tons of comments from these people.
    1
  29.  @bakters  You have far too much hope for me to agree, but I wish I could share in that optimism. I've seen enough of history to know that things are leading down a very dark path that it's likely humanity will not come back from, but we most assuredly won't even if they do.
    1
  30.  @bakters  The printing press was a technological advancement that caused change. We haven't had such an event to cause this change. What's happening now has been going on since before I was born, it's just that it has been accelerating for the past 20 or 30 years. As far as I can tell, people have only recently been waking up to reality. Scant few believed the warnings, but the slippery slope is indeed real.
    1
  31.  @adambester3673  In other words, you can't even answer the primary question of what rights are being taken away, because you know that statement is a lie since no rights would be taken away by your political opponents because it's only your side that does that. The left takes rights, real genuine rights, and I can name them.
    1
  32.  @adambester3673  And since my last post was apparently filtered I'll state it again in another way, there are no rights that the right is going to take away from you, but there are plenty of enumerable rights that the left will take away from us. The sides are not equal or even on the same coin. The left is demonstrably evil.
    1
  33.  @dan-bz7dz  The only way all people of any given religious affiliation would have equal rights there is if Israel was the one state solution. But I'm going to assume you're brain damaged since you don't recognize the genocide of whites in South Africa.
    1
  34.  @RohithkannaDuraiswamy  How did previous developers deal with it then? Did they merely read the code or has the documentation been deleted? If the former, then again, I'll state that they're asking for another developer to take time out of their busy schedule to assist the Rustaceans in their task of taking everyone else's place. If they can't read C, then that's on the Rustaceans, not the kernel devs.
    1
  35.  @DevanandPA-vq1yj  I must've missed that, but that's not so bad as long as you are good at spelling.
    1
  36. I'll take the bait and correct you with, WINE Is Not an Emulator.
    1
  37.  @pgtmr2713  Now I can't tell if you're serious, because it's not an emulator, it's a translation layer.
    1
  38.  @YadraVoat  You may have found the single legitimate use for NFT's.
    1
  39.  @gruntaxeman3740  I think he's got a point here. If it still works, it's still valid. The fact that people want to throw away everything just because it's not the latest and greatest is rather shameful and wasteful. This is why so many modern pieces of software suck, because modern programmers think you can just throw more RAM or CPU at it and solve the problem inherent in the code. That's the Rust way of thinking. Don't be like Rust devs, be like C devs. Keep what works.
    1
  40.  @gruntaxeman3740  No language is fully self contained and monolithic in functionality. Although, C comes pretty close. However, C is still the most efficient language on balance, as in balancing both user and programmer time. You can write inefficient code in any language, but modern programmers seem bound and determined to do it with all of them.
    1
  41.  @gruntaxeman3740  Apparently you've never heard of a library. You write code once then use it in multiple projects. As far as more lines of code, no, not even on a per project basis because we have this thing called code reuse. If you can't write your code efficiently, then it's you, not the language. Also, as far as launching a new process, the scripted language didn't just stay running and wait for a new script to be called, nor do such considerations matter as much when the OS caches things. This also largely depends on the web server in use, but secondary CGI programs that are more likely to be cached are smaller things like C programs, not whole interpreters for scripted languages that then have to load a script and parse it.
    1
  42.  @gruntaxeman3740  Sounds like you've never worked on anything at all. You're really starting to sound like a Rustacean with all this nonsense.
    1
  43.  @rancidbeef582  That's probably why those on the left keep saying it, because they know that if they say it we won't do it, but they will, and it'll enable them to push us all into camps before they get rid of us once and for all. When the left tells us what they're doing by accusing us of doing it as they do it, we really should believe them and start doing it so they don't eradicate us.
    1
  44.  @Leonidas04052  Then you still don't get what's happening.
    1
  45. One problem with that statement is that nearly all of the correctness checks are compile time only. It really boils down to the competency of the programmer, even in Rust.
    1
  46.  @alexpyattaev  Which is why I qualified that statement with "nearly". People use UB like it's an insult or a detriment to the language, but really it's just to allow for platform specific behavior and optimizations. Generic solutions, like what most languages come up with in an effort to avoid UB, tend to be slower. If anything, UB in both C and C++ actually gives them leeway to solve problems in better ways.
    1
  47.  @alexpyattaev  There's nothing inherently unsafe in undefined behavior. It just puts more burden on the developer to make it safe. In fact, you can write an entire program that avoids all UB and still does useful work and it won't guarantee that it's safe. You can even hit multiple points of UB when writing your program and it could still be safe in a portable way.
    1
  48.  @alexpyattaev  Some elements of UB can be used to determine information about the platform. The portability is a manner of determining how the UB works to guide compiler flags for how your program should proceed.
    1
  49.  @alexpyattaev  No, you look at the output. For quite a few non-standard behaviors you can write a simple program that generates output based on what the compiler does and use that output as input for the next phase of compilation. On Linux systems a lot of this can be handled using a configure script.
    1
  50.  @alexpyattaev  Well, it wouldn't help you with the compiler miscompiling, but if the compiler optimizes away a null pointer check, then it's a bug in the compiler. I think you may have inferred something from what I was writing that I definitely wasn't saying.
    1