Right, so you can’t “enforce” a return from the function.

shouldn’t Rust enforce returning from function

How do you enforce returning from exit or a function with a loop that never terminates?

You’re kidding yourself if you think most people in this thread are actually programmers. Most people here wouldn’t know the difference between C and Rust code if they saw it, let alone be able to write anything in either language.

I also don’t think people should learn to code but that’s because I want to limit the available workforce and inflate my wages.

We have already accomplished a great deal. Compile-time C++ is already fully free of UB, which means a huge chunk of real-world C++ is already UB-free today.

This statement is so categorically ridiculous that I have no choice but to assume that Herb Sutter is deliberately trying to mislead people. I would be very surprised if even 5% of “real-world C++” occurred at compile time. In fact, I would be very surprised if even 5% of “real-world C++” was valid constexpr that just ran at runtime.

“Duo Code Review” just seems to be AI trash instead of an actually useful feature. I was hoping it would be some new way of code review or something.

You can tell he’s a simple minded idiot because Jabbascript and Go aren’t immediate disqualifiers in all scenarios.

I was more thinking along the lines of having FOSS repos that are primarily used by me but which can accept external pull requests by anybody with a Github account.

I like the idea of running my own machine for CI but I don’t like the idea of having to become knowledgeable about avoiding exploits.

Just self host an open source runner like woodpecker and you’ll never have to move again

How painful is the setup and general maintenance/security?

I’m considering the idea but I just don’t want to deal with people abusing exploits in the actions that give them access to my LAN.

I can’t define jerking but I know it when I see it.

It’s worth considering the original sub rules:

• Original sources only, no manufactured jerk
• No socialjerking (IMO this one is super critical to not just devolve politics spam)
• No crazy people
• No enthusiastic youngsters
• No long unjerk threads
• No implicitly untagged jerk (this will probably be hard to enforce since some replies seem to be serious)

I have used cargo ramdisk before with success.

According to this this slideshow:

At a fundamental level, this is the state of terminal emulators today as I saw it. You have fast terminals, feature rich terminals, and native terminals. You can pick at most two properties to have.

Ghostty aims for – and in my opinion already achieves – all properties.

Also, calling out the warning signs, my bar for a native platform experience is that the app feels and acts like a purpose-built native app. I don’t think this bar is unreasonable. For example, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that Alacritty is kind of not native because new windows create new processes. Or that Kitty is kind of not native because tabs use a non-native widget. And so on (there are many more examples for each).

Take a look at xtask. It essentially relies on the fact that you can add cargo aliases in local files in order to execute specific packages.

When I create a workspace that has some form of code generation I like to overwrite cargo gen to whatever is doing the generating.

Number 4 is only about not returning impl Into and instead just returning T.

zellij is a terminal multiplexer like tmux which for example allows you to have multiple terminals shown in the same window. It works both locally and over SSH. Which GUI would do the same?

I’m currently using zellij after previously having used tmux. For me zellij is a direct upgrade in every way, and the default tmux keybindings are even supported out of the box in zellij which makes transitioning incredibly easy. The only downside is that I have no idea how to pronounce the name.

That’s a bummer. I guess what I though was PyO3 type hints was actually just PyCharm guessing at the types.

I tried creating a .pyi file and it seems to be a pretty big improvement over no type hints, but I don’t know how to add type hints for modules added with PyModule::add_module and adding the .pyi file seems to make the type checker not know about my other modules.

Would you mind sharing the script for auto generating type hints? Keeping them in sync manually would be pretty annoying.

How is the quality of the generated bindings?

I have previously used PyO3 for Python bindings and it doesn’t seem to correctly generate type hints.