skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> thread::scoped leaking destructors under certain conditions.

Note that this problem is one that has no analogue in other languages.

In most languages, including Rust, you can already "leak" things by putting them into a static hashmap and forgetting about it or sending them to a blocked thread or whatever.

Rust is unique in that it can demarcate types which are bound to a scope. Which gives the auxiliary guarantee that the object would be destroyed in that scope regardless of what happens next (because such objects cannot be returned from the scope or placed into a global hashmap or whatever). There is no analogue for this in other languages. Rust is not "incomplete" for not having this.

The current scoped API depended on this guarantee, but it turns out that there are convoluted ways to bypass the guarantee (so it's not a real guarantee). There's a new design that's been proposed which doesn't need this guarantee.

non-blocking io can be done via mio, and I think using serde for json is easier.
Do you have any peer reviewed studies to support that statement?
Smallwall 1.8.3
Software engineering blogs.

Not interested in opening up that debate, but I thought based on the title this would be something else.
Play with intonation and pauses.

When I moved to the UK was the first time I was introduced to "how are you doing?" followed by someone walking straight past me without waiting for a reply. It took me months of replying after someone and getting annoyed at how rude they were before it sunk in that "how are you?" in the intonation commonly used, is not a question but a greeting, and that it was most certainly not an invitation to start a conversation.

Basically you can't tell without considering intonation whether these utterances are just pleasantries, or heartfelt statements and questions.

I found it very enlightening to play with intonation a few years back when talking to shop assistants. You can give a flat "how are you?" that everyone interprets as a greeting, and just keep talking. But just a slight intonation change followed by a pause, and suddenly you get near total strangers pouring their heart out to you about their day.

Same thing goes for things like "take it easy". Throw it out, and it's just a bland pleasantry. Pause and go "take it easy" and pause again while looking at someone, and it totally changes character.

I think that delivery matters much more than the actual words.
Video showing how to solve the connect the towns problems with soap+water
it's not even supposed to be a funny joke. It's just an idea, "think free as in speech, not as in bear" is a plain thing to say just explaining which definition of the word is meant. It's not a joke or clever.
I understand the view that state sanctioned violence is bad. But right now, this is not our biggest problem. Corporate violence is.

Granted, states do give corporation power by enforcing laws that suits them. But they also keep them in check: there are anti-monopoly laws, people aren't allowed to enslave themselves by contract… Let's get rid of corporations before we get rid of the state.

This is why I have absolutely no problem with the GPL. The only meaningful way to infringe it is to use GPL code to make proprietary stuff. Presumably to make money —wait, no, to extract money. The worst potential offenders would be big corporations, who can do many bad things with proprietary (or secret) software. I mean, just look at Gmail: its purpose it for Google to read your e-mail so it can send you more effective ads. (I know no Google employee will actually read your email. It's all automated. Which makes things worse: if you can search for unicyclists to sell them juggling balls, you can search for dissenters to rat them out.)

In our ongoing fight against power-hungry corporations, the GPL is at worst a necessary evil. We need state sanctioned violence to prevent the likes of Apple, Microsoft, or Monsanto from enslaving us all. It's a double edged sword, but it's the only one we've got. (I'd like to avoid contemplating the more… direct approaches for now.)
You had to pay a fee? To create things for free?
The Doctor as Writer
Your company's motives are not pure and altruistic.

Huh?

Let's be clear: CloudFlare is a for-profit company and hence wants to take in more money than it spends. We do that by getting people to pay us. Our revenue is from web site owners paying us. It's pretty clear what our business model is: pay is a little for bandwidth and hardware is possible, get web site owners to pay us.
Something like this happened in St. Louis. The community protested, and they ended up canceling the hackathon.

Details here: https://www.philipithomas.com/stl-hackathon-canceled-after-s...
One thing to keep in mind is that CV formats common in other countries, such as attaching photographs or explicit statements of age, marital status, etc. may lead to immediate exclusion as a candidate due to EEOC liability. This more common in corporate environments, but might also stand out as a bit of an oddity in smaller companies.

Good luck.
The battles over water rights have been going on in the west for at least a century, so I'm not all that optimistic that you're going to radically change how it works. But I still don't see what you're hoping to accomplish with this talk of "farming in the desert" as folly. What would you possibly do with the 30+ million acre feet that currently goes to agriculture? More golf courses?
I use flock and timeout for most jobs.
PEP257 – A Static Linter for Python Docstrings
"dilutes European culture and identity"

But how could these be diluted? Do you perhaps mean "change", "expand", "put into question"? And is it more important to save those fleeing for their lives or your sense of "undiluted" identity? (Moreover, an identity historically forged through their exploitation.)

The prime minister of Israel should be reminded that Israel was created as a sanctuary for his people fleeing those exact völkisch sentiments he now preaches. I know from personal experience that there are many Israelis who share this view and are appalled by his words [0].

[0] http://972mag.com/special/aslyum-seekers-2/
No shit! I was super excited about sodium-sulfur about six years ago when Ceramatec developed a ceramic membrane claimed to allow low-temperature NaS batteries (IIRC, below 98 degrees C, with solid Na electrolyte). I've heard nary a word since.
... as it should be...
<meta charset="UTF-8">

..would not even take even 500 seconds.
Maybe golden shackles would be appropriate?!

I actually do release some code under GPL, but it's when I want those restrictions in order to prevent certain types of commercial usage (and of course when my code uses or is based on GPL code). But I certainly don't consider it to be free in any way except free as in beer.
"You are probably thinking about it too hard." That CIO who said that should be fired.
Not really. Care to explain?
Why manufacturing gender equality in tech is a lost battle
Not sure about other parts of the world, but here in BC we do have licensed Software Engineers for these purposes. Most software developers aren't licensed though.
I think caution is advised at applying these studies broadly, as you are doing. Not only are they done on WEIRD populations, but a limited subset of that grouping.
Operation Homecooked Mobile Device Lab
You could ask the same question about companies such as Novell or Sun.
I'm Norwegian and have lived in London for 15 years now, and I can't say I've ever noticed Brits pouring their own glass before others. I think I'd have noticed, as I would have found it quite rude if people served themselves first.
US perspective here, but I've seen people work while sick if only because they couldn't afford to take sick days for whatever reason. Everything from making money to pay bills/put food on the table to being unable to afford a doctor visit so they just deal with it for as long as possible. :/
Yes, WebRTC is also a contender, almost final before I came across QUIC. I was also studying it, the application has to be reliable, so except for the DTLS, I can't skip any other layer of stack. I just have to make a final test to compare the reliability and speed characteristics of TCP vs SCTP (and maybe QUIC) for the application. WebRTC also has excellent P2P features, that's again a big plus. Thanks for the help!
You don't just pay for the number of hours, but for competence too. That's the point.
It's not childish and silly at all. DRM is Digital Restrictions Management. That's what it is. It isn't an institution or a program code or anything, it's literally just language summarized. It's not like USA, it's more like LOL and AFK. Adapting it to a more accurate meaning is perfectly fine.
Tim Cook heard this guy and added Urdu Nastaleeq in iOS9
How is it incorrect exactly?
> when you gather a lot of information on people, you become a target

The uncomfortable truth for many HN readers is that this is also true for all of that user data that businesses are currently aggregating: from the data people trust an online service to manage to the modern version of "library records" we call analytics. Thee is value in all of this, or it wouldn't be worth paying to collect/store it.

Unfortunately, even if the data is collected with the best intentions, the fact that the database exists creates a target that must secured. It also creates an "attractive nuisance" for governments holding national security letters and PRISM. Those are troubling enough, but gathering data about people has another risk that is rarely addressed: moral hazard. There is always the temptation to sell that data to the highest bidder, which we have seen happen many times as businesses look to find new ways to "monetize" their users.
And every officer in the military has to get a Secret clearance.
Germany drops investigation into claims the NSA tapped Angela Merkel's phone
I should have added *sarcasm regarding the funny part.

I have to disagree though, most users have no clue what that means other than it costs them nothing. And many developers simply ignore and violate the terms because they don't understand the restrictions.
Granted I've only participated in 3 hackathons but the times I went I just walked in and found a cool thing to work on. I didn't have to sign anything or pay a cent.

Is this sort of legalese normal in the US for hackathons?
Ask HN: How many companies fail to engineer for scale?
And how many over-engineer for scale that never actually happens?
Hackathons are not free to run at any significant scale. (especially when prizes are involved)

Usually, the costs are covered by sponsors, and I can't find any indication that there were sponsors for this event.

EDIT: Comment is incorrect; there were sponsors, see child comment.
The compiler team wasn't mixed in. The front end team developed a compiler within its own team over a multi-year period - this was in response to the question "Do you still separate the teams working on innovations from the teams maintaining today’s core business?"
Rust is certainly harder to pick up than Go (and possibly Java), but I don't think that makes it any more complex than, say, C++.

The difference is in the learning curve. The concepts Rust forces down your throat are the same ones you'd need to learn in some way in C++ anyway (well, not the same concepts, but similar ones having to do with avoiding segfaults). The difference is that you can write simple programs in C++ whilst blissfully unaware of the perils that come later. On the other hand you sometimes need to understand ownership for even the simplest programs.

But for a larger application, you have the same amount of learning required if you want to responsibly write an app in C++ or in Rust.

When we're talking about using a language for something other than teaching programming newbies, we really don't care about small prime number programs being harder in Rust. We care about how hard it is to write large applications, and I strongly suspect Rust isn't harder than C++ for this.

Oh, by the way, for the most part lifetimes work themselves out[1] without effort from your side. And if you find them complicated, you can always compose the relevant wrapper object (like Rc for refcounted memory management -- almost a GC) and use it. It's a bit more verbose, but it's not hard to grok.

[1]: http://manishearth.github.io/blog/2015/05/03/where-rust-real...
I can see your point, and it's the best one I've heard so far in favor of Go over the JVM. But I feel that there are two serious fundamental problems with Go -- or rather two classes of problems -- that are likely to hinder progress as a Go project grows:

1. Go's over-fitting to Google's development style, especially the over-reliance on dependencies as source-code.

2. Go's lack of hackability that might bite you down the line when you need something that Go really can't provide. Go's only hack-hook is source-code manipulation (which brings us back to point #1), and at this early a stage we already see too many tools going down that ugly road.

Go is probably the least hackable mainstream language I've encountered. In C/C++ you can always poke around the implementation details when there's no other choice; with Rust there's unsafe; with Java (and other JVM languages) there's full bytecode control; with scripting languages there's metaprogramming. All those "backdoors" should, of course, be used sparingly if not rarely, and then are best done by experts and hidden from sight, but they're always there for when you need them -- and you invariably do for that last 1%.

With Go -- there's absolutely nothing. You can't even drop down to C to muck about because you'll mess up the delicate runtime. So Go is indeed a descendant of C, Java and Python, but neglects to provide the hackable escape hatches from the plain language semantics all of them do.

Those two things scare me (not that I'd give up on deep monitoring or polyglotism otherwise, but still) because not only are they risky, they're exactly the kind of thing that people don't notice when the project is young. I feel like there's a very important lesson here that seriously bit people in the ass that Go failed to learn (well, that and no support for immutability of any kind).
Actually GPL is more often than not the "we give you the source but we keep the copyright so if you want to use this in commercial purposes you need to re-license with us" - and it also doesn't work really well in the "open sourcing" in that case because people often build "enterprise version only" features on top. Look at Qt or Mono for example. I'd say GPL fails at "free software".

Also GPL leads to a lot of shitty situations - for example - I'm developing a muscle simulation library for my product and my content pipeline is based on Blender. Under Blender GPL license, since I'm not redistributing Blender or any code from it in my product, I don't need to opensource my code.

But if I want to integrate my tool in to Blender and give it away for free (to give back to community since my product isn't about animation) I would have to release it under GPL which I can't do. So in the end I can't give something back because of GPL. I could maybe do stuff like distribute a binary that talks to Blender via IPC but that's just a waste of my time and a suboptimal design solution because of a non-technical license reason, I'm not going to do that.

Also Blender is actually a decent core tool, if they allowed companies to develop commercial plugins on top of it via LGPL or something it would (IMO) make the Blender adoption much faster.

IMO GPL only makes sense if you plan on making a profit from the code you're releasing by re-licencing for commercial use, otherwise it's just a PITA.
Client side validation is a user interface improvement when it provides convenience. It does not replace server side validation because server side validation ensures application integrity. Of course applications that run in the browser muddy the water a bit, but still whatever hits the server requires scrutiny.
Only for small values of "all." The magic of concatenation and auto-conversion of strings that's baked into the Java compiler and, to a lesser extent, the Go compiler, is missing in C++ - not vital but convenient. Similarly, hashmaps, while built directly into the language in Go, are a library class in C++. Finally, garbage collection will likely never be part of C++.
Compilers used to be something you paid money for. It took a while, but open source and I would say gcc in particular killed that.

It's funny how gcc was around for a long time, but it was only in the 2000s that cash cow compilers started dying. I think that coincides a bit with Linux and OS X becoming popular for developers. For example, it wasn't until 2005 that Microsoft started providing a VS express SKU.

You see Linux start to kill old school commercial Unix (like Sun) around the same time. Probably the same trend.
You should read phkahler's comment very carefully, because I think it's especially important that people with such strong ties to non-GPL licenses as yourself fully understand these licenses.
We don't hear much about them, but most software is actually custom software. Only a tiny fraction of software enjoys wide distribution. Operating systems and Web browsers for instance are a minuscule niche, in terms of development effort. They just have a disproportionate impact.

Writing decent quality Free Software is easy: write custom software. Just give them the source code, and assign copyright to them. Or, give them a GPL (or BSD) licensed copy. Depending on the specifics, the software may not be free for you. But it will be free for its sole user, which is what matters.
Precisely. I actually just left a reply on your other comment saying the same :P Oops.
That's a nice straight forward business model most people can get behind.

The problem comes later, as it does when any company gets big enough. Few years down the line, the board of directors has a look over the company and see's a big opportunity: all that data you're flowing around can be turned into money with some very clever thinking at 'no real loss to anyone'.

People don't like to leave money on the table if they can just find a clever enough way to put it in their pockets, and more than enough very smart people saying "hey, pay me a little bit and I'll get all that nice money off the table for you - nobody will mind, privacy is dead anyway!"
Surely the parent comment only meant that Rust was too complex to use, not that Rust was unduly complex. If Go would be a feasible choice, Rust is probably solving problems that aren't too relevant to you.

I think http://arewewebyet.com/ speaks to the completeness point sufficiently. Rust-the-language is probably complete enough for all but the most serious use-cases, but Rust-the-ecosystem isn't.
> Giving credit as a matter of courtesy is often good behavior. However, neither the modern three-clause BSD license nor MIT require it.

Read the very first clause of the 3-clause BSD license, and the first condition of the MIT License.

You'll find that they both require you to retain the "above copyright notice" which usually includes a line such as "Copyright (c) <year> <name>".
Sun ignored the rise of commodity hardware. They were relying on the Internet and Wall Street bubble in the late 90's. When those both popped, a Sun took a big hit.

Anyway, why does answering this help with Borland?
yeah… except that all sorts of developers and users get to adapt and run the GNU/Linux OS and related software and do all sorts of valuable work. It's tools that they use not only at low cost, they also adapt them. The ability to set up your OS how you like is a direct result of the freedom the community has to build things and adapt them as we wish. It isn't just about the Linux kernel.
Take a look at LibEtPan, an open source Mail framework for C: https://github.com/dinhviethoa/libetpan

This is by one of the guys from Sparrow (RIP) [1] and powered it under the hood.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sparrow_(email_client)
Farming in the desert is folly because that water could be put to much better uses (e.g. allowing more growth in the cities). Farming only happens in California because farmers don't pay for the real cost of that water. We don't have to do anything with that land. We have plenty of land in the U.S. Water, not so much.
Bummer about all those IPv4 traceroutes. I'd like to see the output of IPv6 traceroutes or mtr output.
Amazon does have POPs in Australia, but they cost more so many companies choose not to use them.
You're acting like a child who keeps asking "why?" to every statement. Don't stay hung up on "is my idea of reincarnation real, or not?" - because that is just a concept. What's the difference between two trees? What did you bring with you when you were born? Whose mind would be reincarnated? There is no mind - the concept of a mind exists; and there are brains. Science is a concept. Religion is a concept. I never equated them, because what I am describing is not a concept: reality itself is not a concept. Your either/or viewpoint will get you nowhere in these matters: there is no alternative - it is both, and neither; non-dual. I'm telling you that the starting point for this experiment is to look at reality closely, without trying to complicate it by saying it must be this and not be that. It is what it is.

Of course, this makes no sense, because I can't make that step for you. It could take minutes, or years, to get the point. Be instead like the child who sees the order in clouds without labeling them as seeming to be this or that as they move across the sky. The experiment is experiential to the individual; do these things, and expect this result to inevitably occur. Do not these things, and it will not occur. Thousands of years of the same results, and yet you ask for evidence to be produced by others instead of yourself.

Don't misconstrue this as a personal failing - everyone starts from the same confusing position you are expressing. That each individual must overcome this futile attempt at reasoning and thinking their way to liberation is only a problem when you are determined to solve the problem in that way.

Look. Spin a pen or shoot a basket until it can be done without effort or thought - who is it that has learned this? Motor memory, brains dissected and labeled; etc., but all that is useless towards learning or doing. Would it ever be the same to describe how these actions are done with words as it is to do them without words or thoughts? I can spin a pen skillfully for a long time with the simple directive of "don't drop it", and my fingers do it for me. Over time, they avoid actions that did not lead to the desired outcome, moment to moment. When that brain that has learned that action has been dissolved, who would expect it to be innate in a new being? Yet the knowledge of how to do this thing was never mine; it is available to all to use.
JS Functional Libraries (from underscore to ramda, from composition to currying)
▶+UK+TO+OPT+OUT+OF+WW3+-+YouTube
At university hackathons I have been to there's usually a short waiver covering liability and sometimes ownership. Nothing very extensive compared to many legal contracts these days, but I would say that given the rather litigious culture in the US these sorts of papers are justified. The one mentioned in this article definitely sounds more troubling, however.
You might want to ask your founders for a copy of their original pitch deck.
So, OpenWRT (https://openwrt.org/) exists only because of the FSF enforcing the GPL. A non-complient company tried to unlawfully withhold it, and only because the GPL has some teeth did it actually end up with the source available.
Wow, this is out of control... so I make an app at the hackathon... the city of Detroit gets full rights then someone uses the app and dies or gets hurt and they sue the original programmer meanwhile, the city owns it and uses it 100%.

This is out of control!
So, I'm curious. I know how data driven Google is - have they done studies on whether Go met its goals w.r.t C++ development?