rustfreeforme
Yes, "putting the pussy on a pedestal" is definitely a danger that many lesser men fall into.
* laugh track deafening *
Go 'have a discussion' with the nearest wall. It's what you're good at.
This is your problem. You keep guessing, and guessing, and guessing, constantly missing the mark. You keep arguing, and arguing, and arguing, because you just really, really, really want to be right, but you just really, really, really aren't.
> But to spin this the other way around: in lieu of the Bun case, why not use it to rewrite the project in Rust, Zig, D or any language of your choice (yes, even C)?
Because as I just explained to you -- pay attention -- there is no way to magically do that, without introducing bugs. Period. Bun being the canonical example of the sort of dumpster fire that comes from trying to hop from one language to the next like a woman changes shoes. Their code is notoriously junky and they switched to Rust as if it was the actual solution to their problems, rather than just a hype-chasing marketing stunt.
The actual solution is to hire competent engineers and write quality code. Idiots do not write good code in any language.
> Given the role harnesses have in keeping agents in check, it seems plausible that languages with stricter safety features help agents avoid common issues.
lol
I thank God that none of the shit code you and your pet AI write will ever touch my PC.
> You seem to be forgetting that proper software engineering is just as much about managing developers and their skills as the actual code structure.
You keep missing the point, over and over and over again, in your zealous desire to Be Right.
As I said about 15 times already: the problem with Chromium IS GOOGLE, not C++.
GOOGLE desires to own the entire world.
GOOGLE wants Chromium to run on everything, everywhere, and be everything to everyone.
GOOGLE wants to track and monitor everything everyone does, at all times.
Chromium, as a result, is a giant, bloated, buggy heap of shit, THAT CANNOT be properly maintained IN ANY LANGUAGE, due to the extreme level of bloat.
GOOGLE is the author of their own misfortune here, not C++. Making their project into an unholy chimaera of C++/Rust isn't going to solve any of their problems, but only worsen them.
Everything else is just noise. No, Rust isn't some magic language that just magically makes everything better, as I already told you that you will learn over the next couple decades. But don't take my word for it, just keep doing what you're doing.
> 1. Max your 401(k) or equivalent employee contribution.
> 2. Buy inexpensive, well-diversified mutual funds such as Vanguard Target 20xx funds.
> 6. Maximize tax-advantaged savings vehicles like Roth, SEP, and 529 accounts.
What if I told you that the people who own BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, Fidelity, Northern Trust, and Geode -- six companies who own practically all of the S&P 500 -- have decided they will be emptying out every nickel from your pockets in the near future?
Yes, citizen, put all your money into the index funds especially, and just forget about it. Let the Experts in the casino handle it. You both agree: they know exactly what to do with your money, way better than you.
Thanks to the Experts, your retirement (and life) is now dependent on the performance of Quality Companies like the SpaceX pump and dump scheme, plus other dogs like OpenAI when they join the fray. I'm sure you have nothing to worry about.
By the way, the next giant market crash (1929 style) is imminent as the Everything Bubble has found its needle, so enjoy your window seat on the spaceship to Hell. You buys the ticket, you takes the ride.
> 3. Never buy or sell an individual security. The person on the other side of the table knows more than you do about this stuff.
This is the type of nonsense specialists always tell each other. Generalists have long experience having to deal with this strange mindset that it is only possible for a person to understand one narrow category of things, so everything else must be outsourced to Other Competent Specialists In That Field. Sharks in the financial markets are well aware of this mental weakness and love to introduce things like mutual funds, ETFs, index funds, etc to assure the marks their money is being handled by Competent Specialists who really have their best interest at heart.
Here is what better advice looks like: don't buy/sell any securities unless you, personally, know exactly how and why you're going to profit from it. Anything less is gambling. In this time of economic malaise, war, extreme uncertainty, if you haven't spent decades figuring out what's going on, then you shouldn't be touching any securities at all.
Yes, that means most market participants right now are nothing but gamblers, and the casino always wins.
There's a saying in poker: if you haven't figured out who the mark is in the first five minutes, it's you.
> 4. Save 20% of your money.
Finally, some decent advice. But save it for what? That part is left unanswered. And why only 20%? Saved money is always losing value due to being eaten away by inflation, so like a game of hot potato, you need to figure out a plan to deploy it profitably in a time of increasing uncertainty. In a high inflation environment, if you're not growing, you're going broke.
The correct answer at this moment in time (and good advice in general) is, save your money and invest in one or more proven, profitable, Great Depression-proof businesses that pay you a dividend.
> 5. Pay your credit card balance in full every month.
Better advice: stop borrowing money from sharks, live inside your means, and stop being tracked and owned by whoever owns the credit card companies.
[...]
> 9. Promote social insurance programs to help people when things go wrong.
If you follow all of this bad advice, you're going to be the one needing those 'social insurance programs.'
By the way, insurance is a scam.
Hope this helps.
Wow, what a magical language! [ waves hands vigorously ] will fix all the problems which are inevitably introduced by auto-porting from one language to another, or by manually rewriting everything from scratch. Rust doesn't obey the same laws of the software universe as other languages, it seems.
Rust will even automatically rewrite itself to use its own special idioms rather than whatever loser idioms it has sadly inherited from the C/C++ code which the developer, in his infinite benevolence, has decided to lift from its Dark Ages level of inadequacy to Modern Language Standards, with nothing but joy and happiness as the result. Miraculous.
Or is this a "just use magic AI to do it all bro", type situation?
In the latter case, why don't I just use the magic AI to auto-magically solve my C/C++ problems, rather than rewrite the entire universe from scratch? You know, like Google claims to have done for Chromium C++ sources in this very news article?
> ...the vast majority of these features don't even run at compile time. Some of them can't even be implemented in C. For starters, show me an example of a Hindley Milner type system implemented for (how can someone improve a strictly compile time feature, static typing, with a runtime implementation is beyond me)
What part of "I don't care about any of that crap" aren't you grasping?
This is the type of shit noobs are always wringing their hands about, as they want new toys to play with and/or maximum guardrails to cover for their ineptitude. Which is exactly why Google wants these kind of things, as their median developer is some kid fresh out of college. They want a magic language that will protect the idiot programmer from himself and eliminate all errors, so that any trained monkey can use it, as they plan to train actual monkeys to do this if they can somehow get away with it.
Well, that isn't Rust. Not even close. It's just the next horror show masquerading as a "fix."
No, I just checked, and there is no problem detected here.
It does not matter if you despise C/C++ or not. The fact of the matter is--and it's very simple:
YOUR ENTIRE WORLD IS BUILT ON C/C++.
EVERYTHING YOU BUILD ON RUST IS THEREFORE BUILT ON THAT FOUNDATION.
YOU ARE 100% DEPENDENT ON C++ AND--SHOCK, HORROR--C. FACT.
Saying Rust is the replacement for C/C++ is like saying Python is the replacement for C/C++. No, not quite.
Maybe after decades of ' ' progress ' ', Rust will become an actual alternative to C/C++. All you have to do is laboriously rewrite everything in it, or just do a half assed source translation via AI or some other junk tool. No big deal, I'm sure you'll make rapid progress in getting right back to where you already were, just like the KDE 4 folks did.
> It already is an alternative to C++. The fact that LLVM is written in C++ doesn't change the fact that you can write software that otherwise would be written in C++ or C, in pure Rust without writing a single C or C++ source nor header file.
facepalm
> * links to some Chromium bullshit *
I don't go to Google for advice on how to design software, thanks. Especially not to the Chromium source, which is a gigantic flaming heap of trash, exactly the sort of thing those idiots produce, foist upon the world, and then everyone believes is the ultimate standard when it is in fact a flaming pile of shit.
As I already said, the problem with Chromium isn't C++, it's Google.
Tell me why you think you're right.
Hint: you're wrong.
> Rust adds the borrow checker (and especially with non-linear lifetimes it's an implementation like the world has never seen before, not even in Cyclone). That alone raises it leaps above both C and C++.
No, not really. It's an incremental improvement at best.
In time you will learn about all of the faults and flaws in Rust, after you've suffered the pain of trying to rewrite the entire universe in it just to fix one single class of problem you are obsessed about--inevitably introducing many new bugs in the process, because that always comes with the territory.
I know exactly what the successor to C/C++ looks like, and it's not Rust.
> But even without it, it still has a Hindley Milner type system (which most people considered superior to multiple inheritance), it has Sync/Send traits, the concept of UnwindSafe, proper destructive moves and affineish types, proper sum types and matching, sane iterators, lack of UB on uninit/overflow/etc, a sane module system, hygienic macros, and that's just the things I was able to pull of the top of my head right now.
Blah blah blah. Most of that is just added runtime complexity that I could add to C if I wanted, but why would I? None of that crap is needed. Most of it is wankery, the sort of stuff that 20-somethings salivate over but which in the end is meaningless, just change for the sake of change.
> Not to mention, the design of its stdlib is absolutely lovely compared to what C++'s stdlib has become, and it focuses on correctness much more than most other popular languages.
Ada is the language to emulate, not Rust or C++. Again, the actual successor to C/C++ looks nothing like Rust.
* laugh track deafening *
> The sentiment of "if it compiles it probably works" for languages like Rust and Haskell is there for a good reason.
It could compile and still have 10,000 logic errors.
Rust is not a major advance over C/C++, only an incremental and quite limited one, which will require decades of rewriting perfectly good code to gain its dubious benefits, in the process introducing numerous other errors.
But don't take my word for it, I'm just the guy who--as usual--is aware right now of facts the rest of you will slowly figure out over the next 20-30 years, after the hype has worn off and you're left with the sad mess that is Rust.
citation needed
Oh no, it seems my one brief post wasn't long and detailed enough to immediately and totally convince some Random Doubter on HN, therefore my 'claims' are 'unsubstantiated.'
> No one said the only problem with Chromium is C++. But it certainly contributes with some of the problems (specially those related to security).
Nah. It doesn't.
> And, no, these bugs don't come from "noob programmers." They come from experienced engineers.
I'm in the Chromium source every day, and I see junk code written by 20 year old noob programmers all the time.
> Then you just mention that removed some "unnecessary and unwanted" code. According to what standard? You?
That's correct! My opinion matters, to me at least. All the spyware and malware in Chromium is unwanted by me, along with a ton of other dubious 'features' that I don't ever use. I'm hardly the only one with this opinion.
Your opinion may be different. Maybe you are into voyeurism and like being spied upon. Maybe you use all these useless and unwanted features that I never do. Feel free to keep using slow, bloated junk, while I speed along in the fast lane.
> Would be nice if you went into specifics and provided some benchmarks.
Yes, wouldn't it be nice if I took time out of my busy day to create some benchmarks, since totally convincing Random Skeptics on HN was and is a major goal of my post and of my life in general.
> Instead we are forced to take the word that a user "rustfreeforme" (wonder which biases they have)
It's definitely not possible for fluffybucktsnek to just take my word here. I wonder what biases he or she might have.
> made an polished fork, instead of, possibly, mangling the code in such a way that just benefits them and screws other people.
Yes, you should just assume that's what must have happened, and then move on, blissfully unaware of how wrong you are.
> Finally, Rust doesn't: make the code more complex than C++
Sure it does. There is extra machinery/interfacing for all the extra Rust crap bolted on, and it gets more and more complex over time and they integrate more of the crap. Furthermore they vendor the entire Rust compiler, library, etc, all of which has to be compiled first before the browser. It adds a ton of complexity and slows thing down, exactly as I explained. It cuts hours off the compile time simply by getting rid of LLVM and Rust.
I've only just started on this version and the repository is already down to a fraction of the size, so repo operations are way faster, and searches through the code base are way faster, with less noise in search results. I already know this is just the beginning of progress, as my previous experience doing this has already shown everything will get much, much faster before I'm done.
> C++ and Rust compilation times are on par (and keep in mind Rust is very unoptimized here, where as C++ is slow by design).
Feel free to optimize Rust then let us know about your super fast language that is actually an advance on the state of the art. I'm not interested in slowing down my compile times any further, or even remaining at the same speed. Both C++ and Rust are way too slow. That's why at a later date I will be auto-translating the Chromium code from C++23 (current) back to C++11, or maybe even C, if/when my tooling is advanced enough.
Not 'would be.' They are.
> But most would agree that writing code on languages that provide better and safer tooling is a positive.
Most of whom?
When the 'language that provides better and safer tooling' is written in and depends upon a giant ecosystem of components written in the language which you despise, your belief system is garbage.
> Sure, the main Rust compiler currently depends on LLVM, which is currently written in C++. But the rustc team might choose to follow a similar path to Zig and replace LLVM, or LLVM might get rewritten in Rust.
Please do so at the earliest opportunity, so that your language can actually become an alternative to C++. Then you'll actually have a leg to stand on.
> Finally, while most bugs are logical, the most damaging ones, security bugs, are primarily related to undefined behavior.
False. Nonsense. Not true.
It reminds me of hearing city folks discuss with wide eyed apprehension what they believe it's like living out in the country: "omg there's ticks, and bugs, and snakes, and chiggers, and murderous rapist hillbillies, and racists, and KKK members, and ..." and it's all mostly just fevered imaginings of their ignorant mind.
Lots of that same energy here with the Rust crowd as they discuss the horrors of C/C++ -- which incidentally the entire UNIX world is built on, including Rust itself via LLVM and a thousand and one other dependencies.
Sure you did.
It's quite silly what some of these Rust beliebers actually believe about the "total unsuitability" of C/C++, which their entire world depends on.
In before "but muh UNSAFE MEMRY ACCESS!!1" etc. The vast majority of bugs in software are logic errors, and reinventing the wheel with Rust does absolutely nothing to solve that.
The problem with Chromium isn't C++. Not even close. The problem is the ever expanding, bloated code base, the never ending growth of the features list, and the noob programmers they have constantly churning out moar junky code. Just like Microsoft or Oracle crapware.
If the plan instead were to produce a finished, polished end product, taking all the effort that goes into adding more spyware, AI crap, etc and just shine and polish instead, the result would be quite different.
I know that for a fact because that is exactly what I have done in two previous versions--removing shitloads of unneeded and unwanted code, cleaning and polishing the rest, with the end result being a very snappy and responsive browser, even on old hardware.
Rust doesn't do a damn thing to help anything here. It just makes the code/interfaces more complex, the compilation more agonizingly slow, and is another giant pile of shit vendored into third_party. My fork removes all that noise along with Google's vendored custom clang, and it builds with system gcc or clang.