bluejekyll

.exe has bindings to OS ABI and system calls, WASM doesn’t have this by default, it’s up to the VM to provide whatever environment the WASM executable needs, ideally there should be no system calls, no stdio, just instructions on how to interpret the file format.

WASM is platform independent.

What do you mean by C bindings? C bindings to what?

I feel like every language has its fans. What invariably happens is that people want their favorite language to work in every situation that they might need to work.

Personally I would choose Rust as well, but I would choose Rust for almost everything I do. I can see why a Go developer would want a similar experience.

I guarantee that there are a ton of sites out there not monitoring their certs.

GPL is copy left, it has a stated goal of encouraging more software to be OSS, including new contributions. That’s what I meant by software remains open. MIT on the other hand can be used in closed source situations. While the original code will remain open, future changes are not required to be open source.

A discussion on licenses will go sideways very quickly. GPL does limit the adoption of software in certain environments. So it really depends on your goals. Do you want an OSS project that will be useable by everyone (including corporations) or do you want to guarantee that the software will always be OSS and guarantee that Corporations can’t benefit from it without contributing back (potentially requiring them to open their own proprietary code).

There’s a lot of moral perspective that people apply to this decision, but not all developers have the same goals for their software. MIT is more flexible in its use than GPL, but doesn’t help ensure that software remains open.

I found the title for this post misleading. To clarify it a bit, AI has only improved productivity by 10% even though 93% of devs are using it.

This is ultimately the thing that needs to be fixed. The exemption for small trucks was stupid, and it should have been reserved for literal farm equipment (as that was intended). The fact that SUVs slip by on this now has created such a dumb market.

I need that little bubble that separates me from other people.

I get the same independent feeling from others you describe while riding my bike (not a bubble, but that’s a false sense of security in a car giving the 40kish car occupants who die every year in the US). In fact, I generally enjoy that bike experience more than I ever do driving because I never get stuck in car traffic, never get stuck behind a line of cars at a traffic signal. Never need to work about parking, other than finding a secure place to lock up (which some destinations lack). I used to love driving, but I started commuting by bike for work and realized over time that I enjoy biking so much more that I go weeks at this point without ever driving.

FWIW I live in a smaller American city of about 120k people, but is part of a greater metro area.

I really like this advice, but aren’t these two examples the same, but yet different advice?

// Good? for walrus in walruses { walrus.frobnicate() }

Is essentially equivalent to

// BAD for walrus in walruses { frobnicate(walrus) }

And this is good,

// GOOD frobnicate_batch(walruses)

So should the first one really be something more like

// impl FrobicateAll for &[Walrus] walruses.frobicate_all()

I suspect that Mark Twain would even greatly appreciate the humor in referring to it that way.

The American Heritage Dictionary is far better than Merriam-Webster in my experience.

Rust pretty much nails all of those.

“The tea bags used for the research were made from the polymers nylon-6, polypropylene and cellulose.”

They aren’t pure plastic.

As I recall, BeOS was asking on the order of $80 million, NeXT was acquired for $400 million.

I found this reference, so 80 valuation, Be wanted upwards of 200, “In 1996, Apple Computer decided to abandon Copland, the project to rewrite and modernize the Macintosh operating system. BeOS had many of the features Apple sought, and around Christmas time they offered to buy Be for $120 million, later raising their bid to $200 million. However, despite estimates of Be's total worth at approximately $80 million,[citation needed] Gassée held out for $275 million, and Apple balked. In a surprise move, Apple went on to purchase NeXT, the company their former co-founder Steve Jobs had earlier left Apple to found, for $429 million, with the high price justified by Apple getting Jobs and his NeXT engineers in tow. NeXTSTEP was used as the basis for their new operating system, Mac OS X.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Louis_Gass%C3%A9e

The primary reason to legalize isn’t to make it easier to do drugs, it’s to not use the justice and court system for dealing with addiction problems.

Our goal should be to legalize use and then take the money saved from police enforcement and funnel that into programs that get people off drugs. In the US an issue is that the latter part is part of the healthcare system, and we all know that has a lot of issues in serving people who fall into the under-employed category.

was guesswork on what the code word for Midway

More specifically, it was active counter intelligence where the US sent a false report of a water issue on Midway broadcast in the clear that they then picked up the Japanese report of the issue. They used that to discern which codeword Japan used for Midway.

This debate about regulations is alway interesting. There are regulations which help protect the environment, like not being allowed to dump dangerous chemicals into your local stream or river.

Then there are regulations like these which are aimed at protecting the investment companies have made into infrastructure, effectively granting them a monopoly.

When people debate this, they often are thinking of the first class of protective regulations that are too onerous on companies, but I think most people like clean drinking water and rivers that no longer catch fire.

Whereas the second class of protection is really harmful to the consumer, and the powers-that-be have effectively been given a monopoly, and with that the money and power to protect their place in the market through continued influence on elections and other things to maintain these rent seeking businesses. We all hate the latter, but these companies have a lot of sway over politicians.

Perfect!

This is great to see. I had my own effort around this that I could never quite get done.

I didn’t notice this on the front page, what JVM versions is this compatible with?

The article links to two PHP and Rust integration strategies, WASM[1] or native[2].

[1] https://github.com/wasmerio/wasmer-php

[2] https://github.com/davidcole1340/ext-php-rs

Ok, the GP is only using carbon offsets, but the economic one are just as good. Forgoing car ownership allows for that money to then go other economic uses. Forgoing fuel costs, $20 for electric, $100 for gas, again allows that to go into the other areas of the economy. These are easy to calculate, why not use them?

Thanks for the shoutout to Hickory. It’s always fun to see what people build with it. Nice work!

I’ve always thought POSIX compliance is the primary thing vendors should be targeting for portability. I was trying to find something that would explain the difference between POSIX and UNIX compliance, but there’s not great sources on this specifically.

I imagine UNIX is a superset of POSIX, I’d be curious if anyone knows of a simple comparison between the two?

Not to be that guy, but if you’re doing a new CLI and you want something as fast as C++ but closer to the out-of-the-box cross platform and general use of Python, Rust and the Clap library are a really good option. I can whip out a bug free program with that combination in 15 minutes that works on macOS, Linux, and Windows.

Technically all of these make targets look for files by the names of the targets. Each one should really be defined as .PHONY.

That said, I used to write makefiles like this all the time, but have since switched to just and justfiles in recent years which make this the default behavior, and is generally simpler to use. Things like parameters are simpler.

https://github.com/casey/just

You make a great point, but you’ve done it while insulting an entire group of people, which is unnecessary.

No, that is not the entire point of DoH. That’s like saying the entire point of TLS is to prevent users from looking at the traffic being sent to a website.

DNS without DoH, DoT, or DoQ, is wide open to anyone snooping traffic in the raw, that’s not necessarily information you want to share with the world.

I think you need to consider the intention of why you would want to write base components of FreeBSD in Rust. It’s not to make a Rust operating system with its own new features, it’s to maintain and develop on an in existing system with current users, fixing bugs, offering an upgrade path that’s generally backward compatible with existing usage. New features in Rust, old features probably kept in C, unless they are highly problematic.

This is exactly my experience with Rust as well, people keep thinking C++ is an alternative to Rust with all the same features, but it’s not true. Rust is in many ways a simpler language than C++ and that can make it more productive, “To Kamp's assertion that developers should just use C++, Somers said that he was far more productive in Rust and his code had fewer bugs, too. He said he had used C++ professionally for 11 years, but was more skilled in Rust after six months. The problem, he said, was C++.”