the Rust folks wouldn’t care about the in-memory representation as long as the compilation is on point.
Well I can't speak for everyone, but Rust is very intentional about supporting things like repr(C). At least some of us care a lot.
tatterdemalion
joined 1 year ago
Nah these are the actual integer representations. Otherwise you would have Some(None) == Some(Some(None)) which is way too Javascripty for Rust folks.
All of my top picks have been mentioned, but I have a few more that stand out from recent memory.
Hijack (Apple TV+) was one of my favorite thrillers, perfectly wrapped up in one season. Multiple jaw-dropping moments. Very hard to put down.
Perry Mason (HBO) is an enigmatic murder mystery that will keep you guessing. Characters are written with depth. Feels realistic for the time period.
Watchmen (HBO) is a faithful continuation of the comic book that, like the book, uses superheros to explore ethical and social issues instead of drawing clean lines between good and evil. Also responsible for teaching many Americans about the Tulsa Massacre.
I have a feeling you are misunderstanding what is meant by "theorems for free" here. For example, one theorem that is proven by all safe Rust programs is that they don't have data races. That should always be a requirement for functional software. This is a more pragmatic type of automatic theorem proving that doesn't require a direct proof from the code author. The compiler does the proof for you. Otherwise the theorem would not be "free" as stated in OP.
And a lot more bug prone. I'm just explaining the OP because people didn't get it. I'm not saying dynamic languages are bad. I'm saying they have different trade-offs.
Yes if you use type annotations. Languages like Python and Typescript end up resorting to "Any" types a lot of the time, which breaks any kind of theorem proving you might have otherwise benefited from.
It's making fun of dynamic languages because rather than letting the compiler prove theorems about statically typed code, they... don't.
Was anyone else bored of this meme as soon as it started?
As a non-physicist, what is the technical reason Elon was wrong? I assume that when the CEO said 500 pounds, they meant 500 pounds of force relative to some surface area of the floor? I'm guessing that surface area was significantly larger than one wheel on the rack, so the combined force of all 4 wheels was still well over the limit. Maybe someone who knows physics could explain better.
I don't even think he's that smart.
EVERYBODY STOP. Nobody make a move or the memory dies. We have a Mexican Memory Standoff.
I don't like the default behavior where I have to hold a comment to collapse the thread. Is there a way to change it to just a tap?