Hardware signing stuff is not a real solution. It’s security through obscurity.

If someone has access to the hardware, they technically have access to the private key that the hardware uses to sign things.

A determined malicious actor could take that key and sign whatever they want to.

Editor/IDE, whatever. People claim both about jetbrains.

If you want a purely editor-thing:

Whatever vscode does with Ctrl+D (I don’t know the name). Ctrl+D is probably the hotkey I use most in vscode (probably more than Ctrl+S), yet CLion doesn’t have that. I’ve searched multiple times the whole settings for it.

Those two examples are just the ones that most recently occurred to me, it has a lot more issues. For example the lack of a staging area. You can’t “git stage” in CLion.

And I don’t think that the git integration is free from criticism. Git integration is one of the most important features of IDEs. It’s absolutely valid to criticize it.

The autoformatter also doesn’t work correctly when developing in remote. Which means that unless I want my PRs to have thousands of lines of whitespace changes, I can’t use the auto formatter.

Now I don’t know if this is a CMake issue or CLion. But at one point It was "#include"ing a struct from a header file I had deleted 1 hour previous to the build failing. The only way to fix that was to create the file again and delete it again.

These complaints might seem small. But put together they are hours of wasted time that you don’t expect from the “best” of something.

Don’t need to go all the way there. I always heard that jetbrains make the best editors. Yet when my job forced everyone to use CLion I saw that it was just a lie. The editors aren’t good, they are just expensive.

There are 2 easy examples:

1. Remote developing sucks. Loading a remote cmake project takes ages. Yet if you remove the temp directory it’s almost instantaneous. Except when you do it too often and clion refuses to sync the files, then you’re fucked because there isn’t a “sync” button, it only happens automatically.

2. The commit log is awful. It doesn’t by default show you the commit/branch you’ve checked out, it shows the chronologically most recent commit. There’s no “go to checked out commit” button either, you have to write the hash in the search field. Which btw the search is trash. If you write 6 of the characters of the hash it shows “there are no results”, yet when you write the 7th, suddenly your commit appears.

Damn. Alacritty has no features?

If you want to use instructions from an extension (for example SIMD), you either: provide 2 versions of the function, or just won’t run in some CPUs. It would be weird for someone that doesn’t know about that to compile it for x86 and then have it not run on another x86 machine. I don’t think compilers use those instructions if you don’t tell them too.

Anyway, the SIMD the compilers will do is nowhere near the amount that it’s possible. If you manually use SIMD intrinsics/inline SIMD assembly, chances are that it will be faster than what the compiler would do. Especially because you are reducing the % of CPUs your program can run on.

They should be paid though

Spaniard here. Not only does my company not pay me for lunch time. It also demands it to be at least 30 minutes long. How is it even legal to force my unpaid time to be a minimum amount?

I don’t know why you are being so rude. I thought it was the rust community that was known for being toxic?

It’s not my opinion on what the unsafe keyword means. That’s its purpose. Nobody ever wants to write unsafe code on purpose. The unsafe keyword was created to allow safe programs to be created in rust that wouldn’t be accepted by the strict rust compilers.

In a Venn diagram, there are 2 circles: safe programs (1) and programs that are deemed safe by the rust compiler (2).

Circle 2 is smaller than circle 1 and entirely contained inside it. However, there is no reason to not let people write programs from circle 1 that aren’t in circle 2. The unsafe keyword exists to enable programmers to write those programs in rust. However, it comes with a warning, now the programmer is the one responsible for making the program inside circle 1.

A crate having the unsafe keyword doesn’t make the crate unsafe. The unsafe keyword just tells the compiler: “I know that what I’m trying to do may lead to memory safety issues, but I, as the programmer guarantee you that the codeblock as a whole is safe, so turn off some of your checks”.

Using the unsafe keyword in rust is no much different than using a C library in rust.

Even though they are not what people mean when they say “memory-safe”, it is technically a kind of memory safety. It is unsafe to modify non-mutexed/non-atomic memory that another thread might be modifying at the same time.

Presumably, if you’re looking for a partner, if the potential partner is looking for a partner it’s better.

The tinder one is though. Someone being on tinder doesn’t tell you anything about that person. Only that they’re looking for either a partner or casual sex.

What’s up with all these posts lately talking as if C was the chain breaker that will let you achieve a higher spiritual level for your soul or some shit. This is at least the second I’ve seen this week.

It’s a programming language. If you want to use it, use it. There is no illuminati pulling in the strings to prevent you from learning this holy language.

That being said, like all programming languages, it’s a tool, with its upsides and downsides. Depending on the project it might be the best choice or the worst. But with the advancement in language design, there’s very little upsides compared to more modern languages, taking into account its big downsides.

Well, game freak is still a Japanese developer. Mario Cart is a very computationally light concept, as usually are Mario games, idk about odyssey in particular though, but they tend to be small maps with small amount of entities each. Zelda is fair, I’ve heard good things about it.

It’s easy to make a good performing game if its concept and art design are computationally light. Optimization is about turning a computationally hard problem into a light algorithm that doesn’t take much resources.

The new Pokemon games grind to a halt if you are in the south of the map and look at the north. Because you are rendering the entire map. How is that optimized to hell and back?

It’s a one line function in an example. It’s a getter.

Lmao, and they say dynamic typing is supposed to speed up the developer.

This is literally a getter function. How is a getter awful code? It’s the simplest function there is. The only function simpler than that is returning the input itself.

Python doesn’t check the types of function headers though. They’re only hints for the programmer.

For rust I use iced, as it meets all my needs and is a delight to work in. I don’t think it’s good for making graphs though. For graphs I heard that people like matplotlib (in python), which you can also use inside PyQt apps. I’ve tried using matplotlib and did not enjoy the experience at all, but I don’t know of any alternatives.