Thanks, I’ve save your comment. I haven’t heard of any of these.

It also has real type safety and thread safety.

Do tell.

Here’s some of my personal complaints. I don’t in general know how to fix them.

1. proc_macros need their own crate

2. generics cause problems. Many useful macros can’t handle them. Try using a generic that’s a complex async function, then pass a closure to it.

3. There’s this kind of weird mismatch where sometimes you want an enum wrapping various types, and in others generics. I find my data flows switching back and forth.

4. async in rust is actually really good, but go does it better. I don’t think rust could match go without becoming a different language.

5. Traits are just a big mess. Trait implementations with generics have to be mutually exclusive, but there aren’t any good tools to make them so. The orphaned trait rule is necessary to keep the language sane but is incredibly restricting. Just today I find certain a attribute macros for impls that doesn’t work on trait impls. I guess I have to write wrappers for every trait method.

6. The “new type” pattern. Ugh. Just make something like a type alias that creates a distinct type. This one’s probably easy to fix.

7. Cargo is truly great, but it’s a mystery to me right now how I’m going to get it to work with certain packaging systems.

To me, Rust is a bunch of great pieces that don’t fit together well.

Rust. It’s a qualitative improvement over the old ways.

The future won’t belong to Rust itself, but one of its descendants. Rust is too clunky to be the ultimate expression of its best ideas.

I guess I don’t know. Whenever something tempts me to R, I quickly find that Python’s got a good-enough solution.

Best scientific packages in the open source by far, a library for everything, everybody knows it. Works on all kinds of systems. Available by default in many OSs.

You might not like it, but you can’t leave.

They don’t think you have disposable income. They don’t care about you if you don’t.

It’s just easier to get old windows games running on Linux.

When you own the game you have the choice whether to back up the game and whether to keep a computer that can run it.

Who’d have thought not actually owning the games you purchase was a bad idea?

Yes, in a month the linux share will be above 10000% of steam users.

Maybe AI will boost open source development more than commercial development since open source devs don’t have the privacy concerns.

They finally got Sopwith.

In an interview, Douglas Adams said after lengthy consideration John Cleese picked 42 as the least interesting number.

The difference between Linux and a cult is that Linus Torvalds actually did what he said he’d do.

I’m not arguing none of this matters.

This is what I’m arguing: if Valve had control of the gaming industry, which it doesn’t yet but might later, it would matter so little that we’d need no public policy to address it. Anyone who isn’t in the industry needn’t concern themselves about it.

I don’t like Valve. I don’t like the non-ownership model of game distribution.

Users aren’t captured at all, since none of them need to purchase video games. Game developers may be captured by Valve, but game developers aren’t producing anything of importance.

I’m for legal restrictions on industry practice that are predatory towards the users, but there’s no need to protect the industry itself from control by Valve, since nothing important is being controlled.

Valve also can’t control the gaming industry if they don’t control the OS gamers use. They may be trying to control the OS, but they haven’t done it yet. Until then, they can’t prevent users from installing games outside of Steam. If Developers are locked in to Steam, it’s because users buy games in Steam and refuse to buy games outside of Steam. The users behave this way because Steam provides lots of value to them.

If Steam starts to abuse users instead of serving them, there’s nothing stopping them from purchasing games some other way.

It matters if people are captive consumers of the product. It does not matter if they can simply stop using the product with no ill consequences.

The same goes for movies, TV, music. You can simply stop buying these commercially with no ill effect.

Valve isn’t dominating an essential industry. They could control 100% of the game market and it would make no difference to anything important.