Neat, but I’d really like it to just handle memory properly without me having to tweak swap and OOM settings at all. Windows and Mac can do it. Why can’t Linux? I have 32GB of RAM and some more zswap and it still regularly runs out of RAM and hard resets. Meanwhile my 16GB Windows machine from 2012 literally never has problems.

I wonder why there’s such a big difference. I guess Windows doesn’t have over-commit which probably helps apps like browsers know when to kick tabs out of memory (the biggest offender on Linux for me is having lots of tabs open in Firefox), and Windows doesn’t ignore the existence of GUIs like Linux does so maybe it makes better decisions about which processes to move to swap… but it feels like there must be something more?

That does look stunning. Not sure it has more than 5 minutes of playability but it definitely demonstrates that you can do proper games with Bevy.

the occasional submodule hiccup because it was misused as a replacement for a package manager when it really shouldn’t

I don’t see why using submodules as a package manager should excuse their endless bugs. I think you just have low standards.

The UX flaws of Git are very obvious IMO. Even the naming is terrible (“index”? What was wrong with “draft”?).

Yeah these seem to all be at game-jam level.

It was shit and GitHub is good. It’s not a mystery. It’s still shit compared to GitHub, you can go and look now.

There was also an incident where they started adding malware to downloads… But really it was already dead by that point.

We use it for triaging test failure (running tens of thousands of tests for CPU design verification).

That use is acceptable because it is purely informational. In general you should avoid regexes at all costs. They’re difficult to read, and easy to get wrong. Generally they are a very big red flag.

Unfortunately they tend to get used where they shouldn’t due to lazy developers not parsing things properly.

Wow that’s an insane amount of changes. Are there any actually fun games made with Bevy yet?

Rust adoption is stagnating

Is it? I would like to see some evidence for that.

because of [the small standard library and potentially supply chain security issues]

Yeah I can guarantee that is not a significant reason for people to avoid Rust. If it was people wouldn’t use NPM, where the problem is even worse.

I do think it would be good to putt some more stuff in the standard library makes sense, or even just add some kind of official sanction of de facto standard library crates like regex… But this author is an idiot.

• Pijul: patch-based like Darcs but apparently solves its performance issues. In theory this improves conflict resolution.
• Jujutsu: kind of an alternative front-end to a git repo (but not a front-end to git). Has some different ideas, like no staging area (draft commit), and some other stuff I can’t remember.
• Sapling: from Facebook. Unfortunately only part of it is available. The server is not public yet (I guess it’s tired up in Facebook infrastructure too much).

And it’s definitely not a solved problem. Aside from the obvious UX disaster, Git has some big issues:

• Monorepo support is relatively poor, especially on Mac and Linux.
• Submodule support is extremely buggy and has particularly bad UX even for Git.
• Support for large files via LFS is tacked on and half-arsed.
• Conflict resolution is very very dumb. I think there are third party efforts to improve this.

I think the biggest issue is dealing with very large code bases, like the code for a mid-large size company. You either go with a monorepo and deal with slowness, Windows-only optimisations and bare minimum partial checkout support.

Or you go with submodules and then you have even bigger problems. Honestly I’m not sure there’s really an answer for this with Git currently.

It’s not hard to imagine how this might work better. For instance if Git repos were relocatable, so trees were relative to some directory, then submodules could be added to a repo natively just by adding the commits and specifying the relative location. (Git subtree almost does this but again it’s a tacked on third party solution which doesn’t integrate well, like LFS.)

Ok cool but how does that help when I’m searching a non-Rust project via the GitHub web search interface? I don’t know why I’d want to search cargo expand output anyway. Using that just to avoid searching tests is a super ugly hack.

Someone find the commit where they accidentally removed this critical component 😄

Yeah… It’s going to take a whole lot more than $1m for this. I am skeptical.

Also not super enthused about another browser written in C++. I skimmed some of their code and it seems pretty high quality, but still… this is going to be chock full of security bugs.

Servo is definitely the more interesting project.

In normal English, when not using a number, sure! But in software, with numbers versions it almost universally means chronological releases of something.

There are many different versions of Windows, like Home or Enterprise. You can get hardcover or paperback versions of many books.

Great examples! Those are both called “editions”, not versions. Thanks for proving my point 😄

They chose “version” because they are just that, versions. Improvements over the original design that benefit from new insights and technological improvements. We’re lucky they had the foresight to include a version number in the spec.

No they aren’t. A higher version of UUID isn’t “newer and better”, like the word “version” implies. It’s just different. It’s like they called a car “vehicle version 1” and a motorbike “vehicle version 2”. The common use of “version” in the software world would mean that a motorbike is a newer and hopefully improved version of a car, which is not the case.

The talking pumpkin is 100% right that they should have used “type” or “mode” or “scheme” or something instead.

Nothing else has code completion that even comes close to being that good.

Well, except Visual Studio (for C++), Qt Creator, and every Java IDE in existence.

I know what both of those are and how to use them. But they are entirely relevant to the thread. Did you comment in the wrong place?

What are you talking about?

Ugh yeah that’s infuriating on Github search too. Obviously if I’m searching for some identifier I don’t want 10 pages of results in /tests.

How hard can it be? Just weight anything with test in the file path lower than everything else. Job done.

Haven’t tried Mojo yet but I have tried Julia and it kinda sucked balls. Sorry Julia fans, but it did. My main complaints:

• It’s a research language like MATLAB, so the emphasis is on repl’s, trying things out etc. But the compilation model is like C++. When you import a package it spends like 2 minutes compiling it. I think it’s supposed to cache it but the second time it was still like 10 seconds for me just to import a package. I believe they’ve improved this since I used it but still, huge red flag.
• 1-based indexing. Come on guys. Anyone using this is smart enough to learn 0-based indexing. It’s like putting a steering wheel in a jet fighter because you worry about pilots getting confused by a joystick. Again, red flag.
• The plotting libraries (a core feature for this sort of language) kind of sucks. In fairness nothing comes close to MATLAB on this front. I ended up paying for MATLAB because of that.

There’s also this article which has more reasons.

I am leaving it a while longer before I try Mojo.

I feel like this is one of those XKCDs that automatically opts you out of sensible debate if you post it.