aratakareigen

For example, if I could push to a Vec while holding a slice to it, that would obviously lead to horrible behavior if the Vec needed to reallocate.

Another example is if someone tried to use a Vec x inside the closure passed to x.drain.

Right, but the question was:

> doesn’t Rust refuse to compile even when you use non-concurrency safe objects in a single thread?

and given that most types (Vec, HashMap, etc.) aren't "concurrency-safe" (thread-safe?), your answer

> yes

is rather perplexing.

Rust types have markers (Send, Sync) that tell the compiler whether they can be moved across threads, and whether they can be simultaneously accessed across threads.

These markers are irrelevant in a single-threaded scenario.

Yep, you can't implement UnsafeCell yourself without running into undefined behavior.

Right. The main advantage of Rust is that its thread safety is opt-out (unsafe) rather than opt-in (remember to use the right data structures / locks).

It is a convention, not a rule, in mathematics to use (+) to represent operations that are commutative (i.e. abelian) groups.

But this convention is not at all respected in programming (e.g. + for string concatenation in many languages) so I have to admit that it's pretty irrelevant.

Literally no "non-tech-savvy" person I know backs up anything at all. I seriously doubt that backup / transfer is on anyone's mind at all when deciding to use a new messenger.

Really? I mean, either a few drug dealers slip through the cracks, you fill the nice fun stadium with creepy surveillance cameras to cover your own ass, or the stadium simply doesn't exist. I'm all for options (a) and (c), but option (b) is the worst.

Why? I can't think of an alternative that users wouldn't complain about.

Great, but this reads like a particularly blunt Amazon ad. Is there a way to achieve "high scalability" without selling my soul to Amazon?

For many lying is already a deeply ingrained habit, and for them honesty will take practice.

> Reading a few top research papers in a field you're interested in and work through them

Why reading a research paper rather than the more standard approach of reading a textbook?

I just started reading, but why does it say "(semi)group" instead of "semigroup / monoid"? I've never heard of inversion being used to perform a fold.

How does TypeScript ensure encapsulation if it doesn't have nominal types?

Edit: The article says "magical hidden properties".

SO(3) is definitely three-dimensional, and rotations don't involve magnitudes.

The space of rotors and rotation quaternions are both three dimensional because the coordinates are restricted to unit magnitude.

Quaternions and rotors are exactly the same in practice, but the intuitions are very different. The intuition behind rotors involves planes and lines in 3D, whereas the intuition behind quaternions typically involves a unit hypersphere; there's a 3B1B video on quaternions where you can learn more about them.

He means an ecosystem where 99% of the work needed to build yet another CRUD app is done for you.

Yep, Stack has an atrocious UX that does nothing but cause progressively increasing amounts of pain. I wish someone would just write the Cargo or NPM of Haskell already.

> Rust and go eventually will be facing same issues

Isn't Rust's workaround their "edition" system? It seems to be working pretty well for them, but it sounds like it could end up being a massive maintenance headache.

https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/edition-guide/editions/ind...

The age, gender, etc. distributions of the people who visit your website. I don't know anything about GA, but I'm guessing they'd know this from the currently signed in Google account.

Return position impl Trait also exists so that you can change the actual return type without making a breaking change.

That line is extremely simple to me. What makes it seem like a "mix-match" of symbols to you?

The equivalent in Haskell would be "compose :: (a -> a) -> (a -> a) -> a -> a", which lacks "impl" because it boxes all closures (each closure in Rust has its own type), and lacks "Fn" because it doesn't care about what kind of access the closure needs to its context (Rust distinguishes between Fn, FnMut and FnOnce). Still, the Rust is only a tiny bit more complicated than the Haskell.

See also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_sort

Another example application of adaptive sorts is the sweep-and-prune broadphase collision detection algorithm that's somewhat commonly used in physics engines.

> provided you have enough charisma points

You answered your own question. Some of us don't have an ounce of charisma<del>, and some of us have been conditioned by years of loneliness to never initiate a conversation</del>. I think this is a pretty valuable service.

The Uber bit makes little sense to me. If Uber takes my car at night, then I doubt I'll make much money, since not many people are out at night. And if it takes my car in the day, then I don't have immediate access to the car when I need it, which is the entire reason I use my car as opposed to a bus or a train.

Yeah, I'm super uninformed here, but single men's expectations of potential partners are totally the prime suspect here.

Anecdote: My uncle explicitly stated on his dating profile that he was looking for women with masters degrees who were willing to stay at home. I have no idea why he wanted that or why my dad's sister agreed, but this kind of demand is oddly common.

Interesting, but why not just have the autocomplete as a pane on the side so that you can focus, in the 99% case where you do have a good grasp of your dependencies?

What is the purpose of life, which you say depends on randomness?

Most of these claims I've never heard before, and I know at least one of them (the claim that inequality is lower than in the recent past) is definitely false, so I feel justified to ask: do you have any sources?

What do you mean? Haskell has, last time I checked, an LLVM IR and a C backend, so it should be very portable.