Thank you WithoutBoats

No, unsafe is implemented in the await/async operators. He shows that in the slides after he shows what I posted.

cuck

Ok

>without boats
lmao wtf

Ah so he does
Gonna have to think about it further then

>""""zero-cost"""" if your time is worthless
>severe mental illness
>requires unsafe
mozilla is fucking DEAD!

I want to use Rust and I don't because it's very clearly ran by the mentally ill.
For the record I have made an effort to learn the language and have programmed some personal projects. Unlike many people, I like it a lot... as a language.

Just thought you'd like to know. Until those """"""people""" have been stripped of any authority, I'm out.

Unless you can tell me how to implement something with zero added instructions then
>zero cost ...
Everyone who has unironically said this should be ovened.

wait...zero cost comments

indeed. the shit presented is literally based on pooling, those people are not right in the head.

Fucking disgusting

Attached: images (2).jpg (495x619, 38K)

nothings stopping you from using it while despising the devs for their mental illness. it's what I do, hasn't really caused me any issues. I haven't caught the gay yet either

oh nononononononononono

I can use it, but not for any high-profile personal or professional project, else I risk getting unpersoned

Unless you're contributing to the Rust project, there's _nothing_ they can do to prevent you programming whatever you want in Rust.
You could make a jew gassing simulator that plays Hitler speeches with 90s trance backing tracks and they still won't be able to stop that.

These metally ill would find the way.

It's just a buzzword the content is good though

wow, after 2 years of arguments over the syntax, it's almost here! I bet it will be horribly unergonomic and hell to work with.

Enjoy ur tranny language

Enjoy your fifteen hour compile times templatenigger++!

Async IO is a feature of the operating system. What does that have to do with Rust?

>rust
lol

You do things at compile time.
During macro expansion.

Huh? Rustrannies are the ones that don't care about compilation times. Literally one of the slowest pieces of shit ever

Yep, it's very slow although it's mostly llvm to blame. I'll take it over runtime cost any day though.

>I'll take it over runtime cost any day though.
Why the fuck does every goddamn nigger on this site think he writes software where microsecond level efficiency matters?

Rust has a proper module system, so there's no spastic full recompile required every time your codebuddy changes a line in some seemingly minor file.
Additionally, Rust's lack of C baggage means much less noise for the compiler to deal with, making it more consistent in delivering reasonable output.

wow, would you look at that, a Jow Forums moron with no actual argument about the language! where have i seen that one before

Attached: thinking.png (451x619, 429K)

>microsecond level efficiency
benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/faster/rust-go.html
i don't even want to link the python scores, it'll make you not want to ever use it

I have very rarely encountered performance bottlenecks in real systems that actually needed to be bleeding-edge fast before some other part of the system took over as the main bottleneck.

Can we even call these a comparison of languages at this point? It seems all solutions converge onto some handwritten SIMD thingy.

>see the "A final proposal for await syntax" blog post on the feed
>boy, sure hope it's not that horrible and completely unintuitive posfix field syntax (because postfix method was too hard. magic fields to yield control make so much more sense than magic methods, obviously)
>"we currently favor adopting the “dot await” postfix syntax"

god fucking damn it.
Like this is actually beyond stupid.
I understand why they prefer postfix over the usual prefix options other languages use, but why the fuck does the FIELD do stuff?
And the provided reasoning is far from convincing. Basically, even a novice user will realize that await can't actually be a field, but not every experienced user will realize that await can't actually be a method.
"So we have to add some magic to the language to make async work. But we can't add too much magic or it'll be confusing."
Field syntax means "access thing". Method syntax means "do thing". Awaiting is doing a thing. How could anyone fuck this up?

I wish Jonathan Blow cared about async at all, we would have gotten a legendary rant on language design about this blunder.

Attached: 1527126657726.jpg (479x358, 26K)

How many languages have gotten async right? If any.

I've only used Python's async and the syntax part feels fine (but many people say the standard async library "asyncio" is busted and a mess). But it wouldn't be fair to compare them and say "just do prefix await like everyone else" since the languages are so different and that kind of syntax doesn't fit in Rust.

Still, somehow, the "most viable alternative" after expression.await is expression await and not expression.await(). You know, the kind of alternative that is completely backwards from anything else in the industry. What?

Async IO in a context of language means using greenthreads/coroutines instead of blocking native threads, I assume. Just like Go and Node (ES6). I haven't watched the video yet.

pretty much this. the only real bottlenecks i saw was human errors (like creating unnecessary objects billion times) and slow device io. optimization of base class libraries let alone language itself never ever entered the equation.

i like c# async

can you not use language like "sh*it*head ? thanks

C

based

I could in a setting that required it. Couldn't you? Doesn't seem like too much to ask, IMo.

I think it's good, Rust is already borderline lisp-tier in bracket closing and having it like this is less verbose than the alternatives

The language?

It's not a buzzword, Bjarne Stroustrup made the term popular and it has a very clear meaning.

Why? It's an important thing weather or not your library has zero-cost abstractions. Only a java-tard would hate it because they can't have it.

Is that a fucking tranny?

Fucking shit

That's actually a nice idea for a game. Now to decide whether to use rust or go. Which will cause more reees?

that's boilerplate tranny coc mr samefag

Only a literal sperg would have a problem with it, which Jow Forums is full of.

Yeah I don't have a problem with that boilerplate stuff. What part of it is so troubling?
>mr samefag
?

The part where it actually means that 'misgendering' someone or arguing with a woman or minority is ban worthy. That's how it always ends up. The people who wants coc's wants to thought police. Otherwise there'd be no need for a coc

>The part where it actually means
So it doesn't say that but you think it does, so it's bad? In the text itself it doesn't seem to say anything concerning IMO.
>Otherwise there'd be no need for a coc
Well if people would just not be assholes to other people, same would be true, but some people just can't help themselves.

Funny how people being assholes was never an issue until these mentally ill snowflakes invaded programming. It's almost like the issue is with them being oversensitive and not general behaviour
>So it doesn't say that but you think it does, so it's bad?
You'd have to be painfully ignorant of what's been going in open source communities in the past few years in to not realize how it pans out

>Funny how people being assholes was never an issue
It was though. Maybe early on when internet was a lot smaller there wasn't as much need, but internet in general has been known for a long time to be a pretty much a cesspit of poor behaviour.
>It's almost like the issue is with them being oversensitive
I guess it depends on the perspective.
>not realize how it pans out
Apart from some people bitching and moaning about how the end is near, not much?

It killed Firefox. Brendan Eich was ousted for a political donation he made over a decade ago.

Attached: 1534947780133.png (700x702, 167K)

>It killed Firefox
>Apart from some people bitching and moaning about how the end is near

Way to dilute the meaning of fascism

Out of all the people to dilute the term "facism", I don't think George Carlin, someone who went to the supreme court over obscenity laws, is the one to do it.

I meant the claim that having a CoC in a project is fascism.

>It was though
It wasn't. See how that works?
>Apart from some people bitching and moaning
Or you know, people being removed from projects they was part of from the part and worked on for many years because some faggot claimed not calling him maam was harassment and literally hitler

>Zero cost abstraction
Impossible. Abstraction in all instances requires hiding complexity with additional complexity.

Not the literal CoC, because the literal CoC is just "be reasonable". The actual problem is when CoCs are used as a political weapon to arbitrarily remove people (eg. the attempted outsting of Rod Vagg), or the Drupal thing, or the Ashley Williams instance which demonstrates the nepotism of the CoC.

Attached: 1535290269012.png (1920x743, 741K)

The way they enforce it does share some similarities with the methods typically used by fascists against critics. It's not fascism though, it's thought control and it needs to be opposed at every turn so fuck trannies and fuck this tranny language. Good thing is, since it's from Mozilla, it wont ever be popular and will like fade into obscurity much like the company that created it

>See how that works?
I really don't. Apparently it was bad enough for people to want have CoCs.
>some faggot claimed not calling him maam was harassment and literally hitler
Uhhuh
Well I can agree with that, if it is maliciously used that's of course bad.

every fucking time

Attached: laugh.gif (350x193, 1.6M)

>Well I can agree with that, if it is maliciously used that's of course bad.
There are two types of people who add a CoC to their project.

1. People who add it because GitHub recommends you to add it, because the creator of the Contributor Covenant used to work at GitHub before being fired for making female colleagues uncomfortable.
2. People who ideologically agree with Coraline Ada Ehmke and want to use the CoC to gain power and control

>I really don't. Apparently it was bad enough for people to want have CoC
A very small, mentally ill, minority wanting something does not mean it was an actual problem not having it
> Uhhuh
Not an argument. This shit happens frequently. This is what happens when you enable and even celebrate mentally ill people. Instead of feeding their delusions, they should try to come with a treatment that actually helps

>it's thought control
Don't most CoCs just concern themselves with how people conduct their business in the project and between people in the project? Not really thought control as having people be respecting of others in their speech and actions. Pretty damn mild if you ask me. You have similar written or unwritten rules about your conduct (and often much stricter) in almost any workplace and I'd say most communities of different sorts.

in my opinion bitcoin is complete shit and is as worthless as the hardware it runs on

>A very small, mentally ill, minority
Pretty rude way to describe the people complaining about CoCs IMO. See how that works?
>Not an argument
Glad to know you noticed

>workplace
This is apologetic for "embrace, extend, and extinguish". It fuels the argument that CoCs are political weapons, and not only do the diversity quota grifters love it, so do corporations because it gives them a mechanism to oust problematic developers getting in the way of their corporate interests.

No. Most people are perfectly capable of behaving appropriately without a coc. Introducing it is pretty much always a power play rooted in politics. Misgendering someone, i.e. denying science in order to not hurt someones feelings, is very much a political issue that has little to do with general behaviour
So basically, now that you realize you have no arguments, you're resorting to i know you are but what am i?

>Most people are perfectly capable of behaving appropriately without a coc.
I don't doubt their ability, but their willingness. Especially when it's anonymous.

>So basically, now that you realize you have no arguments, you're resorting to i know you are but what am i?
Well the point was to mimick your argument to get you to see how weak it is. So, success, I guess?

It's not really anonymous when we're talking about a large open source project though and besides, if it was such an issue before coc were introduced, then how did all those open source project even manage to get to where they are now? I mean, if every is an ass to each other online, then it stands to reason that projects would fall apart pretty fast. That didn't happen, though it does happen once a coc is made
You think you made a point, but you really didn't. It's like playing chess with a pigeon at this point. Do you have any actual arguments or is it safe to dismiss you as a retard?

More instructions != slower. Glibc strlen has more instructions and branches, but is still faster than a small, naive strlen.

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-06 at 11.43.42-fullpage.png (989x2376, 193K)

Ofcourse it will, it's Rust.

Just make sure to tell people that the compiler is "forcing you to write better code" and you'll sucker more people into using this shitlang.

>zero-cost! safe!
>need to use unsafe blocks to develop anything more complex than Hello World, killing the only advantage over C
Nice language, trannies.

Rust makes you gay

>how did all those open source project even manage to get to where they are now
You're arguing that their existence means there couldn't have been problems?
>then it stands to reason that projects would fall apart pretty fast
I don't think if many CoCs have even claimed to do this. The claim is that they make things more pleasant and professional.
>You think you made a point, but you really didn't.
Well the point was to show that what you said didn't have any argumentative power and you agreed with that. So...

>You're arguing that their existence means there couldn't have been problems?
I'm arguing exactly what i wrote. Stop trying to act clever, faggot. It wont work
>I don't think if many CoCs have even claimed to do this
See above. Stop with the fallacious shit and respond to the actual points
>Well the point was to show that what you said didn't have any argumentative power and you agreed with that. So...
Again, you think you're much smarter than you are. You didn't show anything like that. You simply acted like a child

this is the future of information technology.
brace yourselves.

>don't touch anyone without her/his/xer/xis consent
wonder who's a sperg here

The person who has issues with the coc?

>I'm arguing exactly what i wrote.
Unfortunately, since it made very little sense.
>Stop with the fallacious shit
>if every is an ass to each other online, then it stands to reason that projects would fall apart pretty fast.
Can you show me who has claimed this, other than you? You replied to a claim you yourself made and then followed that up with your own "reasoning". What sense does that make?
>respond to the actual points
I would very much welcome this.
>Again, you think you're much smarter than you are.
Probably, though I don't think I'm very smart to begin with.

Yea, i'm sorry. It seems you're incapable of basic reading comprehension and you're arguing from bad faith, using smoke screens etc. We're done

>We're done
When I asked for concrete sources on claims. How surprising.

ok, kid

>Apart from some people bitching and moaning about how the end is near
So you need a CoC to protect your feelings from mean words, but whenever someone criticizes it, they're "bitching and moaning". Those are some high double standards you've got there.