Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Rust made a mistake in going C++-syntax (Score 1) 148

by euroq (#49729401) Attached to: Rust 1.0 Released

What I mean with that is that the language was designed with certain safety mechanisms involved. However, in order to do something as simple (maybe simple isn't the right word, but common) as the printf function, you have to break the standard safety mechanisms. Hence the printf function is a macro, and underneath the hood there is a whole lot of ugliness.

Now, taking a step back further, I think that it's good that ugliness is hidden behind the scenes. My point is that, if one has to get ugly to do the things that need to be done in a printf function, then I expect that it will actually become common and necessary to "do ugly things" in order to get stuff done in real-world applications.

And maybe I'm wrong, who knows?

Comment: Rust made a mistake in going C++-syntax (Score 3, Interesting) 148

by euroq (#49700277) Attached to: Rust 1.0 Released

They could have made the same simple concepts without going C++ style. This is obviously just aesthetics, but I don't think the language looks nice compared to lots of newer languages (Swift, Ruby, Kotlin, and even D).

The :: scope operator is ugly and redundant.

This match syntax is just ugly and hard to type:

    match header[0] {
                1 => Ok(Version::Version1),
                2 => Ok(Version::Version2),
                _ => Err(ParseError::InvalidVersion)
        }

The following is ugly and is not obvious:

use std::sync::{Arc, Mutex};
use std::thread;
use std::sync::mpsc;

fn main() {
        let data = Arc::new(Mutex::new(0u32));

        let (tx, rx) = mpsc::channel();

        for _ in 0..10 {
                let (data, tx) = (data.clone(), tx.clone());

                thread::spawn(move || {
                        let mut data = data.lock().unwrap();
                        *data += 1;

                        tx.send(());
                });
        }

        for _ in 0..10 {
                rx.recv();
        }
}

A simple printf function has to be a macro, because the techniques it uses are unsafe which is a main feature of the language.

OK a lot of these gripes are trivial; I guess I'm getting at the fact that they went an academic route about how to deal with pointers and memory allocation safely, and then built everything around that. It was so academic and engineering-like and they didn't think or try very hard about the design and aesthetics.

Comment: Re:Yeah.... (Score 1) 193

by euroq (#49583669) Attached to: Massachusetts Governor Introduces Bill To Regulate Uber, Lyft

My half brother is one of those doctors who quit because of being sued and didn't want/couldn't continue practicing. It hurts my family very much. But let me tell you, it's not because of "liberals" it's because of many factors. I suppose a completely conservative or completely liberal government could fix it (in a manner disagreeable to the other side), but just like our tax system, the problem won't be solved not because of liberalism or conservatism, it's because of our shitty democracy.

Comment: Re:Yeah.... (Score 1) 193

by euroq (#49583651) Attached to: Massachusetts Governor Introduces Bill To Regulate Uber, Lyft

You're so fucking wrong. Your quick googling sounds like you just googled "climate change science is wrong". Taxis are not monitored by anyone, Ubers/Lfyts/Sidecars are.

I don't want to say this because anecdotal evidence is stupid, but I'm going to because I'm mad that I read your post. I've personally known two people to have been robbed by gunpoint by taxi drivers, and there's no way to track them. There's NOBODY who's ever been assaulted by Uber/Lfyts/Sidecars who haven't been able to have been tracked.

Comment: Re:Most-loved or Most-infatuated? (Score 1) 181

by euroq (#49534005) Attached to: Swift Tops List of Most-Loved Languages and Tech

Of course, good code is 99% due to the person producing it and only 1% (if that) due to the language used

I agree that it's at least a majority of the person producing it, but I wouldn't say 99%. Good language design, in the right and appropriate circumstances, do indeed help. For example, Java (which you mention as bad) actually makes it MUCH harder for software to crash. For example, I lead a mobile team with Objective C (iOS) and Java (Android). The number of users experiencing crashes on the iOS app is around 2.5%, while the Android app is a perfect 0%. I don't think the Android devs are any better than the iOS devs - I am certain it's the language.

For the record, I have nothing good to say about C++ :)

Comment: Re:Easy grammar (Score 1) 626

Like it or not, English is the standard international language.

Bullshit. Spanish has more native speakers than English. Mandarin has close to three times as many as English. Hindi and Arabic are each quite close behind English.

Is that some tribal instinct in you invoking emotion instead of logic? English is by far and away the standard international language. Pilots from Russia landing in Taiwan speak English to the radio towers. Travellers between Spain and France in Barcelona (3 languages there) speak English to communicate.

Just because there are more native speakers of Mandarin does not make it the standard international language. And btw, native speakers is a piss poor statistic for a standard international language.

Comment: Re:Dissolve Fed? Replace with new Model! (Score 1) 825

by euroq (#48956869) Attached to: Obama Proposes One-Time Tax On $2 Trillion US Companies Hold Overseas

I would rather the current government not only be dissolved but replaced by a fully transparent institution that actually protects everyone's rights equally.

Just curious, how exactly would you do that? A democracy? An oligarchy? Even if you had 24/7 monitoring, how exactly would you give such an entity the ability to protect yourself from bad guys and also defend the rights of Muslims and gays equally without bias?

This is not a troll question, this is actually a question that comes up a bunch when drinking with my buddies.

Comment: Re:Double Irish? TAX ALL FOREIGNERS!!! (Score 1) 825

by euroq (#48956845) Attached to: Obama Proposes One-Time Tax On $2 Trillion US Companies Hold Overseas

Well, the issue that so many Slashdotters are up in arms about is a very relevant issue to the tech industry in America. You say that there is no legitimate reason to tax, but what everyone is arguing is that the business IS done here, but accounting witchcraft makes it seem like it's not.

Now, there are plenty of legitimate arguments about certain topics such as the iPhone which is manufactured elsewhere, but the reality is is that there are a lot of American corporations who pay little to no taxes while making tons of money while benefiting from the American government. Many shades of gray? Yes. Feds wanting to tax something that they don't have a legitimate reason tax? Actually not so gray; there are legitimate problems with the tax system that the feds feel like they need to clamp down on.

Now, don't take what I say to be an approval for high taxes or in fact taxes at all; what I'm saying is that you are dismissing the argument of tax loopholes as invalid when in fact there are serious problems that could be solved and simplified for the greater benefit of both American corporations and the American society.

Each new user of a new system uncovers a new class of bugs. -- Kernighan

Working...