each function has its own independent metal toggle switch

one steering wheel to steer left, and one to steer to the right

they want to push a lot of buttons on those controls

LOL

Even with a lot of buttons available, good videogame controls are simple and narrow. Natural combinations add depth without overcomplicating things.

I found it hard to follow despite C# being my main driver.

Using ref, in the past, has been about modifiable variable references.

All these introductions, even when following C# changes across recent versions, were never something I actively used, apart from the occasional adding ref to structs so they can contain existing ref struct types. It never seems necessary.

Even without ref you use reference and struct types, where reference content can be modified elsewhere. And IDisposable for object lifetimes with cleanup.

Yeah, I thought the same. Pretty bad name.

Sharing for anyone else not familiar with AT Protocol:

The AT Protocol is an open, decentralized network for building social applications.

FAQ Why not use ActivityPub?:

Account portability and Scalability through activity aggregation

Bluesky uses AT Protocol. The connected network/platform is called the Atmosphere.

Bluesky Social has pledged to transfer the protocol’s development to a standards body. - Wikipedia

I didn’t see any mention of other software/platforms using AT protocol on the protocol website or Wikipedia.

if the app is properly tested memory issues won’t happen

yeah, no, not really

https://security.googleblog.com/2024/09/eliminating-memory-safety-vulnerabilities-Android.html

the percentage of memory safety vulnerabilities in Android dropped from 76% to 24% over 6 years as development shifted to memory safe languages

Because I stumbled over this paragraph (the page is linked to from Googles announcement) and was reminded of this comment, I’ll quote it here:

First, developer education is insufficient to reduce defect rates in this context. Intuition tells us that to avoid introducing a defect, developers need to practice constant vigilance and awareness of subtle secure-coding guidelines. In many cases, this requires reasoning about complex assumptions and preconditions, often in relation to other, conceptually faraway code in a large, complex codebase. When a program contains hundreds or thousands of coding patterns that could harbor a potential defect, it is difficult to get this right every single time. Even experienced developers who thoroughly understand these classes of defects and their technical underpinnings sometimes make a mistake and accidentally introduce a vulnerability.

I think it’s a fair and correct assessment.

Is your suggestion that people should? Isn’t Rust the more realistic, effective solution because it forces people to do better? Evidently, “correct memory safety in C/C++” didn’t work out.

I would have expected that at least all the frameworks were using the same database, but no. Some frameworks use MySQL, others use PostgreSQL. Some framework implementations are ultra-optimized and others are what you would expect in your average web application. Some frameworks are using proper templating libraries, others are using Sprintf.

Commenter on Reddit (OP there) gives a talk link and summarization:

In the talk, Lars mentions that they often rely on self-reported anonymous data. But in this case, Google is large enough that teams have developed similar systems and/or literally re-written things, and so this claim comes from analyzing projects before and after these re-writes, so you’re comparing like teams and like projects. Timestamped: https://youtu.be/6mZRWFQRvmw?t=27012

Some additional context on these two specific claims:

Google found that porting Go to Rust “it takes about the same sized team about the same time to build it, so that’s no loss of productivity” and “we do see some benefits from it, we see reduced memory usage […] and we also see a decreased defect rate over time”

On re-writing C++ into Rust: “in every case, we’ve seen a decrease by more than 2x in the amount of effort required to both build the services written in Rust, as well as maintain and update those services. […] C++ is very expensive for us to maintain.”

tl;dr: They merged the code of an unmaintained dependency into their project.

I don’t think I can take anything else away from it.

Is it because c++ devs need half their day for recovering from the trauma of reading and writing c++? /s

I opened/open-sourced my ed2k link generator that I use to generate them for files so I can manage my AniDB mylist more easily.

I had done most work in 2022 and have been using it since then. For opening it up I still had to check whether I had sensitive code committed. I had to remove a local filepath from my initial commit. But now it’s versioned and open on GitHub.

Yesterday I started migrating and extending some Mumo project (Mumble Moderator, python app/framework) CI and docs. I plan to further improve it, and to try to reproduce a bug that may be an issue because of changes in a deb/ubuntu library dependency.