- https://github.com/ziglang/zig/blob/1606717b5fed83ee64ba1a91...
- https://www.ryanliptak.com/blog/zig-intro-to-check-all-alloc...
- https://github.com/ziglang/zig/blob/1606717b5fed83ee64ba1a91...
- https://www.ryanliptak.com/blog/zig-intro-to-check-all-alloc...
I love things like these that use existing tests and expand the to just test further thing in already covered flows. We have done similar things at my work where we test expansion of data models against old models to check that we cover upgrade scenarios.
"Oblong" is kind of an awkward word though. Anyone want to set up a fork at .bi.ngo?
Dang, now I'm going to be thinking of .ngo and .ong domains all day...
k.ong - cool word, don't know what it would be for. Maybe the home of the mascot of the K language (I don't think K has a mascot from what I know but they should have one).
whats.wr.ong - find a therapist site.
Much harder to figure out any on '.ngo' I feel...
Ok then, I'll get back to these when we finally have been able to convince the government that the current copyright length is obscene or when they have entered public commons - whichever is earlier (don't make me bring the mood down by suggesting which one I think will come first).
There's "no garbage collection" because Austral lets you have manual memory management without the danger, like Rust.
There are no destructors in the sense of special destructor functions which are called implicity at the end of scope, or when the stack unwinds. Rather, you have to call the destructors yourself, explicitly, and if you forget the compiler will complain.
This sounds verbose until you start paying attention to all the mistakes you make all the time that involve, in some way, forgetting to use a value. The language makes it impossible to forget to do something.
With regard to 'no arithmetic precedence', I tried
printLn((1 + 2) + 3);
and printLn(1 + 2 + 3);
Sure enough, the first one compiles, but the second doesn't.Also, (n-1) is a parse error unless you put a space after the minus.
I got curious if recursion was properly handled, given it wasn't in the anti-features list, but no luck:
module body Foo is
function go(acc: Nat64, n: Nat64): Nat64 is
if n = 0 then
return acc;
else
return go(acc + n, n - 1);
end if;
end;
function main(): ExitCode is
printLn(go(0, 135000));
return ExitSuccess();
end;
end module body.
yields Segmentation fault (core dumped)
The Linux Foundatiom should an engineers-first organization.
The leadership team breakdown shows me it’s full of MBAs specializing in “on a computer”.
I am one who is not familiar with the author previously, and from what he brings up I am highly inclined to agree with him, but I have to agree I became more sceptical to his arguments when all he brings up to support it is one very sparing data point (that graph feels very misleading). Give me data on how the kernel support has changed over time. Give me data on how the foundations income has changed over time. Not showing me any of this makes me very sceptical. Would showing this data not support the authors point?