I think it might be nice if such posts included some background
Build for web, desktop, and mobile, and more with a single codebase. Zero-config setup, integrated hot-reloading, and signals-based state management. Add backend functionality with Server Functions and bundle with our CLI.
I don’t think everyone is up to date on every Rust library that exists
I guess you are being downvoted because that is not directly connected to Rust. It would be a problem with any language
Yeah, compiling from source on Windows is a mess. In that regard it is not a functional OS, one has to install a lot of tools in order to compile the tiniest thing
I would put both ways into the descriptions, just for that one lost person that for some reason has to compile from source on Windows, just to give them a hint where to start. I think, it’s also very probable that if they have to compile from source, they might have a lot of issues with getting VS to work.
It will be a pain anyway, most will probably just download your binary and hope you prefer mining bitcoin instead of ransoming their whole drive
I don’t know but it could be anything else than an Arc. Obviously you should still be able to take a usual reference to such a thing.
Maybe. My point is that unless you want to, for example, have a reference that you switch between which object it references, I think you would be fine with using the ref-counted reference. With eventual optimization done via compiler when it’s sure the code won’t be trying to access the object after it got deleted. But even if I’m wrong, there could be another way to get a pure reference
This proposal as I understand it is an attempt at making reference-counting more ergonomic.
Yes, and IMO by using Handle for that it breaks a pattern. Rust keeps * and & for speaking about values and memory management (I want data vs I want reference). Using a trait for ref-counted referencing adds another layer. So suddenly we have *, & and ::Handle(). You see what I’m getting at?
What’s the use-case for &Arc? Modifying an Arc object in outer scope?
To me, this handle trait sounds a lot like “reference-counted reference”. When there already exists a pure “reference” in the language
I mean, keep the ref-counting. Just from the syntax perspective. Aligning with the example in the post: & before Arc would increment reference count, before a Mutex would reference the same object as it does now
Why not just expand meaning of &?
let l_before = &v1;
I can see how that could be a hassle on nixos and if you don’t have more scripts
FWIW, I use chezmoi for stuff like this, I guess it might be easier to make it work with nixos by setting up chezmoi in HOME, instead of defining scripts directly
At this point, I would make it a bash script and put it in ~/bin. If one has to get back to it 5 years later, it will be painful to debug
For music recorded via microphone, Ardour+Hydrogen
For music created more synthetically LMMS
Jack is the way to go. Save yourself the frustration and use it from the start
Thanks :)
async_println is a part of fast_log?
What are the proper crates that the malicious ones were pretending to be? (I’m new to Rust)
Personally I would start with plain SDL2 and then add GTK. Both of them are language-agnostic, so you are learning something that you can use in other projects too. And are widely used, so while the Rust binds might add some spiciness to the mix, it should be easier to search for clues
They’re trying to replicate npm attacks
Why does this post look like a scam?
We’ve succeeded beyond my dreams. The drivers are fully upstream in Mesa. Performance isn’t too bad… Satisfied, I am now stepping away from the Apple ecosystem.
“Excellent!” the Prince exclaimed. “Your technique is faultless!”
“Technique?” said the programmer, turning from his terminal, “What I follow is Tao – beyond all techniques! When I first began to program, I would see before me the whole problem in one mass. After three years, I no longer saw this mass. Instead, I used subroutines. But now I see nothing. My whole being exists in a formless void. My senses are idle. My spirit, free to work without a plan, follows its own instinct. In short, my program writes itself. True, sometimes there are difficult problems. I see them coming, I slow down, I watch silently. Then I change a single line of code and the difficulties vanish like puffs of idle smoke. I then compile the program. I sit still and let the joy of the work fill my being. I close my eyes for a moment and then log off.”
-L to? Of course, compiling things completely from scratch is unmaintainable anyway (that’s why PKGBUILD was another big point - it’s easy to create your own AUR packages that will get pacman-level maintainability), but sometimes you want to check if that new patch solves your issue/opt. But it should be my decision if I want something installed in /opt/bin or /usr/local/bin. In distros that did not enforce where things are put in, it was all over the place. But to be fair, to me, even bin/sbin separation is bsUnlike Linux, these BSDs have a clear separation of OS from these packages. OS files and data are stored in places like /bin and /etc, while user installed packages get installed to /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/etc.
What do you consider the OS? Is firefox a part of OS? Is office part of OS?
On FreeBSD, the freebsd-update command is used for upgrading the OS and the pkg command is used for managing user packages. On OpenBSD, the syspatch command is used for upgrading the OS and the pkg_* commands are used for managing user packages.
Personally, the ditching of /usr/local mess was one of the selling points of Arch for me, but in a way you could achieve this in Arch. Create a secondary pacman config with RootDir set to /usr/local and alias pacman --config /etc/pacman_local.conf as pkg_pacman
The article could use a link to upgrade walk-through
It would be nice if some part of it was here