tentaTherapist

This is such a ridiculously inefficient means of raising money, for everyone involved. What would it take to just get people to pay for the services that they use, out of gratitude?

I... why? There was no need to compare this talented guy with an over-the-top, megalomaniacal and egocentric scientist from a sci-fi cartoon.

Can you and GP please avoid turning this into a battle to see which is the worse country?

You say 'beloved Objective-C'. Sorry if this is really off topic, but is objc_msgsend (the whole late-binding thing) or anything else about Objective-C particularly appealing? Maybe the decent unoptimized speeds or the fact that you can use plain C whenever?

Because it's a term that means nothing but makes for good marketing.

Nope, this is exactly what low-level Rust code should look like.

I agree with your message but you're way too harsh. At least these guys, unlike antivaxxers, have genuine concerns. Maybe they're not considering the even worse alternatives in their comments, but then again, that's not really their business. Signal isn't losing users because a couple of nerds are pointing out weaknesses in its security.

But you'd have to do that in Rust too, or at least use a library like petgraph, because Rust hates cycles even more than C++.

But then your program uses slow, cache-unfriendly and much-reviled reference counting. I'd even prefer Ocaml and its fully-featured GC if C++ is only fast in artificial benchmarks and not in idiomatic code, which apparently must use RC.

Note: I haven't used C++ at all on any project larger than a single file.

Yeah, but unwrap is very, very explicitly marked, and its use is discouraged, and unlike null it's nothing close to an undesirable edge case on every single pointer.

Edit: In my perfect language there wouldn't be an unwrap, only matching on an Option, but I guess Rust is too pragmatic for that.

Uh, inherently faster as in, there's nothing about the API design that makes it easier to optimize.

Showing them all seems a bit impossible because the number would blow up really quickly, wouldn't it? Maybe it could categorise them, but that could be misleading, too... I don't know.

That is a very well-named problem.