throwsincenotpc

Switching to Rust isn't going to solve Gnome management problems. You could make the case that they should ditch Gtk and adopt Qt, it would actually make more sense than rewriting Gtk in Rust given the amount of work it represents. But you complaining about the tools that don't exist is still ridiculous, the problem is why these weren't developed at first place.

They still had 10 years to do that. complaining about the lack of tooling they didn't develop is idiotic, they are in charge of the language themselves.

lol right, I expect them to move to QT anyway ... /s

> It is not daily fear of AQ that has Muslims wearing their religiously proscribed clothes.... it is honoring their religion.

You misunderstood my message which was quite clear. There is a strong us VS them mentality among Muslims in the west today which wasn't the case 20 years ago. It doesn't have anything to do with KSA pushing for Salafi, it has everything to do with 9/11.

> This is the correct response to terrorism

Breivik was an isolated incident, deadly but isolated non less. There is no correct response to terrorism. All terrorists are different. The IRA isn't the FARC or this or that palestinian groups or Al Qaida or Daesh. Sometimes there is a political solution, sometimes there isn't. There is no political solution with Daesh, these people want to exterminate their enemies, the only solution is to exterminate them before they do.

> This assumes that these groups believe their actions will lead to a direct outcome.

Daesh believes the ends of times are coming and the final battle against "evil" is near so they are just doing Allah's bidding, they believe nothing has changed since the 8th century and they are fighting "the armies of Rome". Do you really think it is rational thinking ? do you really think their can be some kind of political solution in that case ? Daesh is forcing no change upon the enemy, they want to exterminate them like Nazis wanted to exterminate the Jews.

> that's some manager's fantasy

The issue is that in a lot of shops design patterns have turned into a religion and not just a tool to help thinking. I've seen managers like that.

If you didn't implement 15 different design patterns in this or that code base that was "bad design", even if it unnecessarily made the code more complex.

I've seen iterators classes written when a simple for loop would have done the trick. I've seen chains of responsibility implemented when a basic switch statement would have been enough. Of course the code wasn't meant to be refactored in anyways. In fact complexity led to inability to refactor anything as nobody had a clue what went where ... and of course to manage all that bullshit we had to write tons of factories, because instantiating a single useful object now took 30 lines of code ...

> For instance, MVC is a very popular design pattern. When you read code built according this pattern, even if you are not familiar with the language or framework, you know what kind of thing to expect to find in different parts of the program.

The problem with MVC is that it lost any accurate meaning.If you tell me "my app is MVC", I vaguely understand it has a view, a controller and a model but it doesn't tell me if the controller sits between the view and the model or the view directly observes changes in the model.

If you take a pattern like the Chain of Responsibility, or the Command pattern, the goals are clear because they are usually made of a single or at most 2 collaborators. MVC is sometimes a mix between the strategy and the observer, sometimes it isn't yet people still call that MVC.

Design patterns are just a way to convey an idea. If I name something a factory, everybody knows its purpose. If I name something a prototype then people who are familiar with patterns know it will have some "clone" method. So it's a bit like UML redux. But one only need iterators if the language one uses doesn't allow you to naturally express custom iteration without requiring you to write a class or some other boilerplate.

The article demonstrates that fact pretty well.

It's also a good way to judge how practical a language is. I don't need to write iterators in a language that has generators for instance. I don't need to write factories in a language that supports closures... But then people selling all these expensive modelling tools would be out of business ...

My point is it is not the same market to begin with. OVH PAAS and IAAS offer is limited compared to AWS.