Readit NewsReally? Me and my team been using it for years with no problems whatsoever.
> I actually was hoping that we'd get some of the first rust infrastructure, and the multi-gen LRU VM, but neither of them happened this time around.
If we're appealing to authority here's his response a few weeks after the mail you posted:
I'm pretty sure Torvalds is the one who decided to add Rust to the Linux kernel.
> I was expecting updates to be faster, but part of the problem is that old-time kernel developers are used to C and don't know Rust. They're not exactly excited about having to learn a new language that is, in some respects, very different. So there's been some pushback on Rust. - Linus Torvalds https://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-talks-ai-rust-a...
No it really wasn't. He just said let's see how it goes when the rust devs proposed it.
Seems pretty clear cut to me.
Why do rust developers demand everything be re-written in their language? Especially one of the longest running, largest and most successful C projects of all time? It was never going to work out.
There are a few brand new operating systems being developed in rust, why not contribute to them instead?
This is such a bad take.
ctx.Value is incredibly useful for passing around context of api calls. We use it a lot, especially for logging such context values as locales, ids, client info, etc. We then use these context values when calling other services as headers so they gain the context around the original call too. Loggers in all services pluck out values from the context automatically when a log entry is created. It's a fantastic system and serves us well. e.g.
log.WithContext(ctx).Errorf("....", err)What I really miss are methods on structs a'la Go. Just simple receivers would be a great addition imho. Because of this choice, it's affected the entire stdlib and boy does it look old. Creating a typed variable to pass it to a stdlib init function (for allocation, etc) is terrible decision and it's everywhere. The stdlib looks muddled too.
Odin is obviously heavily inspired by Go (among others) but it's learned nothing of the lessons of the Go authors. For example, Odin is a larger language and has fewer features.
I got an ICE while compiling once and it reported something like `TODO(bill) support this`. Not a good look.
Do they WANT to be working on something capable of 'human extinction'? Maybe I'm cynical, but I strongly disagree that anything OpenAI builds on the same trajectory as GPTx is going to end the world.
* Imagine AI giving a terrorist network a recipe for the most toxic nerve gas ever discovered. (This has already happened to AI researches)
* Imagine AI being used for deepfake propaganda inciting a war between superpowers. (This is arguably already in progress)
* or it could be the usual sci-fi classic of an AI intelligence becomes superior to humans and just takes over (using the above methods and more).
AI has the ability to be completely undetectable and incredibly insidious. We could be destroyed by a force we don't even notice.