moreaccountspls

There's a "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episode where Larry David's character donates to a museum with his name on the donation. There's no self deception for him; he wants to do something good AND he wants the credit. And that's totally fine! The character is self aware enough to know that part of his motivation is selfish.

My point is that by not acknowledging the selfish part of "wanting the credit", the author comes off as not self aware [or disingenuous, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt]. That's what I meant by cheapening it for them.

It lessens it for the author because they're looking for validation from someone in some type of way, the same way the breakfast people do. If you're content being someone that needs validation from other people for your actions, then sure, it doesn't lessen it for them.

It's a bit sad that you've taken a wonderful, altruistic act and cheapened it by feeling the need to broadcast it on the internet :(

No, it's not relevant. There's no considering being done, the feature is being shipped. Please stop with the Rust spam.

Nah, there's something unique about Rust zealots in this respect. nicoburns comment is completely off topic, and it's extremely obnoxious to see this kind of thing over and over again from the Rust community. And I even like the language!

That's unfortunate. Try a different dermatologist? I've gone to flatiron dermatology in the past, and they're solid.

I wish I could upvote this a thousand times. At the end of the day, it's all ego driven development. Nobody wants to think that their job has already been solved, and what's left is mundane and boring [engineering wise]. And so the business ends up with using a distributed log to handle a data set that could fit on a big thumb drive.

Yes, but there at least is some genuine innovation going on. The backend frameworks are just churn for solving the same boring and lucrative business problems in new, fashionable ways.

Obviously you should do what you feel comfortable with, but now is a good time to go the doctor and get that checked out. The numbers are pretty low and stable for the moment. And FWIW, I had surgery last week so I'm not giving advice that I wouldn't follow myself.

Alright, I'll bite. Why do you think not breaking users programs is abandoning quality?

> The lexer shouldn't have to deal with that sort of stuff.

The problem with that is that the entire python ecosystem had to deal with that instead...

I'm going way past rant territory at this point, but there's a reason that Microsoft and Amazon are worth a trillion dollars a piece, and it's not because of beautiful and elegant APIs.

So what? In the history of Python, there was literally 0 bugs caused by print being a statement. Breaking backwards compatibility for shit like that is amateur hour.

edit: And just to be clear, I'm fine with making print a function for all new code. There were ways that the python community could have accomplished that [and the unicode switch] without breaking the entire language.

It sounds like you're experiencing panic attacks.

Writing some optional, non-essential piece != rewriting a piece that will require taking rust as a dependency for the rest of time.

The kernel folks just did a lot of work to remove the strict dependency on GCC. To think any of the big players [Red Hat et al] want to turn around and make their shining star dependent on a language that's been 1.0 for less than 5 years is just not realistic.