bambam12897
Joined 12 years ago
Joined 12 years ago
Here is my feedback:
1 - If memory management is a serious problem for the software you work on, I've never found the boost library lacking. This seems like the main selling point for RUST. Given the scope of the project: you guys must be doing something that is so different that it couldn't be rolled into a library - so I'm looking forward to your future posts to see if there is something here that I really am missing out on.
2 - I'm not a fan of the implicitness and I personally don't use 'auto' b/c it makes scanning code harder. I guess this is more of a personal preference.
3 - A lot of things are renamed. auto->let, new->box, switch->box You get the feeling that effort was put in to make the language explicitly look different from C++
4 - the Rust switch statement don't fall through... This one was truly mind blowing. The one useful feature of switch statement got ripped it out! If you don't really need the fall through, I'd just avoid using them completely...
5 - I've never really seen an equivalent to boost (in combination to the STL) in other languages (maybe I didn't look hard enough). Could you maybe make a post about the RUST standard library? Libraries are always the deal breaker
To that point, my last comment is maybe a little more wishy washy. The main reason I'm consistently happy with using C++ (and why I put up with the header files) is that everything is available. If you need to do X, and X has at some point been put into library by someone: you can be sure that that library will be available in C++. Since Rust seems so close to C++, does this mean that linking to C++ code is trivial? If I can seamlessly start programming parts of our codebase in RUST, that could potentially make a huge impact.
You'd think they have more important things to do - given they're running a nation and all..
Anecdote: Joe Biden visited our town recently. I'd bet the amount of money spent on flying him out here far exceeds the amount he raised at the dinner. There is a huge security apparatus that travels with them. Not just the presidential/VP jets, but a few days before he arrived a plane carrying the armored car(s), a whole ton of people in charge of security and god knows what else.
that's not the only option. The company could remain privately owned - in which case you want to have below 100 shareholders so that you can remain a C corp
But it's exactly one year since the hack and everyone is back to talking about how amazing Linode is
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Hackers-Claim-to-Have-Gained-...
The issue was with how they handled the public disclosure of the hack. Instead of immediately alerting their clients that there has been an issue (so that - as you say - people could take mitigating actions) they stalled on giving information and tried to cover up the whole fiasco. This should give people ZERO confidence in their moral integrity.
If you run a service like Linode or DO, you need to provide certain guarantees on disclosure of security failures and maybe get an externally audit from time to time.
Because no one is doing that... I'd have to guess there is more going on
If you just made several mil I honestly doubt you're thinking about making the "transition as smooth as possible". You're thinking "should I buy a Lambo or a Ferrari?"
They probably got a memo from Dropbox saying "now that we own your ass, here is a press release that you'll publish asap"
I'd be more honest =)