kennykartman

Model Summary: Granite Speech 5.0 2B is a compact and efficient speech-language model, specifically designed for multilingual automatic speech recognition (ASR) and bidirectional automatic speech translation (AST) for English, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese and Japanese.

> I really don’t see how you could find the community toxic unless you take everything they want to do differently from other languages (which may come along with some criticism - explicit or implicit) as some kind of toxic negativity?

You are right: I generalized way too much in my comment. I do not mean that all Zig communities are toxic, but at least the ones I read/participate into.

IIUC Fil-C does not allow to freely write safe assembly language as well, right? From the inlineasm page, they say

> Parsing and analyzing the assembly. If it contains memory accesses, control flow, or anything we don't recognize, we reject it.

...But I'm no fil-c user nor expert so correct me if I'm wrong!

By the way

> Zig will become one of the only toolchains capable of producing actually memory safe executables

there's a whole class of GC languages that can do that

Sure, the point makes sense but if that's the sole point I think communication is quite bad. Fil-C is memory-safe only if the whole stack is compiled with Fil-C: this does not hold for Rust which does not require to recompile every dependency. Some dependencies cannot even be recompiled.

So it turns out this is not "unlike Rust", it's pretty much the same thing: if everything was built in safe rust, then it would be as safe. The communication of this point is not great at all, so much so I don't think it's purely informative.

Zig main dev proposes to introduce a Fil-C like compilation mode to make zig safe: it's only natural to mention how that's different from Rust, right? What about all the other languages, Andrew?

I'm tired to see zig head people trying to diss Rust whenever they can. It's annoying for people that enjoy both languages and it's really a hint of how toxic the zig community is.

Honestly, I don't think the EU problem is taxation. Really, there's a long list of things that have higher precedence over that, for example, not being so immigration-adverse.

Ah, sorry if "parents spending more time with their kids" is a too extreme and communist view.

Ok with that. So yes, I stand by my stance: looking at test is enough. We can debate whether when tests can be considered complete enough.

I think you and I don't share what is a "test". Are you thinking about unit tests? I'm thinking about unit tests, smoke tests, integration tests, e2e tests, functional tests, manual QA tests and probably even "the-product-works-as-expected-as-I-can-see-from-the-amazon-reviews-of-our-clients tests".

I agree with your point of view in general, but "having tests" doesn't mean "having great tests". If I rewrite my code and give the binary to our clients and they don't see any difference or bug, well, that means the rewrite passed the ultimate test. In fact, the percentage of our clients that care about implementation details (such as PL) is precisely 0%.

I don't think that from my comment anyone can infer that I'm opposed to reducing general taxation. I'm, in fact, in favor in increasing taxes for who owns too much, not against reducing taxes to population with lower income.

If any EU government people are reading this, I'd like to send you a short message:

Please stop thinking about the kids on the internet. But here's a brief list of things you must work on with higher urgency:

- taxing more large corporations,

- taxing more ultra-rich people,

- funding EU-made (open source) tech and infrastructure,

- let parents spend more time with their kids so they can actually protect their offspring and keep them safe from predators, more than any stupid law you think you can devise can do,

- more trains.

I'm so happy about this. Really. I cannot overstate how much important the internet archive is for all of us.