Something else I usually don't see: A system hitting a fail-safe is a lot easier to detect and handle from the outside than one that just enters an unknown invalid state.
Like, if the rule were "Always-Keep-Running" then hospital equipment power supplies wouldn't have circuit breakers that cut the power when something is wrong. But cutting power seems lot easier to detect for the backup power supply so it can fully take over.
it's funny because I have seen the opposite.
Engineer: "it crashed because it dereferenced a null pointer"
boss: "add null pointer checks everywhere!"
... and because it used "if" instead of "assert", it made the null pointer arg a valid argument, making it a tolerable state of the running software, which displaced the locus of crashes far from the source of the issue. Moral of the story, use "assert" to make it crash as early as possible and debug THAT. You want to restrict the representable states in the software, not expand them by adding null checks everywhere.
I've felt kind of miffed in the past for not being able to join Discord communities. Discord always wanted my phone number, and I wasn't ready to share that.
Not only Trump. Without the rules, Musk or Putin could run as well, the latter even work-from-home style. Also, if justice being blind is so bad before an election, why not after? Figuring out who won shouldn't involve any courts either. The public will just need to figure out who really won for themselves!
I'd rather fix the abuse (the cause of the particular burnout), because it impacts not only the Rust developers, but all current and future contributors, and indirectly us users as well.
You know, people outside the Rust community keep bringing this up as some kind of argument against it. But to me, it's one of the biggest points for it; because the important thing about `unsafe` encapsulation isn't what's inside of it, but what's possible on the outside.
I bring it up because Rust evangelists like to pretend that Rust code with no explicit “unsafe” in it is safe. It’s not safe, though, as long as the dependencies use it.
I enjoy coding in Rust. I don’t enjoy the shit name its community gives it.
Oh yeah you're right that's been stabilised, now that I'm thinking about it, it was probably something like `self: std::sync::MutexGuard<'_, Self>` which told me to enable the feature
From the Linux Plumbers Conference from a couple days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw9pKeJ-4Bw&t=8040s (Warning: It's a longer stream, but the timestamp should be where the driver is shown. There's a table of contents down in the comments.)
Just tried that command (wanted to give rebellion a bit of a go anyway) on my dual-core 4GB laptop with an SSD:
real 5m18,721s; user 6m22,607s; sys 0m20,515s
So, given that the SSD seems to make a difference, and looking at the build output, and that my CPUs looked rather bored, I'm wondering if it's the local documentation builds.
Have you tried `raco pkg install --no-docs rebellion` for comparison? That completes in around 44 seconds on my system.
Not sure about good solutions though, I only use racket for prototyping at the moment.
Like, if the rule were "Always-Keep-Running" then hospital equipment power supplies wouldn't have circuit breakers that cut the power when something is wrong. But cutting power seems lot easier to detect for the backup power supply so it can fully take over.