This user was not using git though, he was using vs code. That button doesn’t say “git reset” it says “discard all changes”. And btw, what it does is “git clean”, which is something that git can do.

Just below the button there is a list of all the changes. In his case, there were 3000 changes of the type “file creation”. Discarding a file creation can only be made one way: deleting the file.

Anyway, this user is presumably in his learning phase, I would not assume that he knows what git reset or git restore actually do.

There is a warning. IIRC it says “are you sure you want to discard all changes? This action is unreverisble”. In the context of version management. Creating a file is a change. And just below the button to discard all changes is the list of changes. In that list he could’ve seen 3000 changes of the type “file creation”, when you discard a file creation, it means to undo the creation, which is a deletion.

The button days what is going to do. There is a warning about what it’s going to do. And there is a list of the exact changes it’s going to undo.

The only way to avoid this from happening is to not have the button exist. In that case, the users that actually want to discard all changes would be unable to do so.

Of course it would output JavaScript. What else?

I don’t even know why people ITT are blaming the IDE and completely ignoring this.

When you learn git, you do so on a dummy project, that has 5 files which are 10 characters long each.

An IDE is not made so you can’t break things, it is tool, and it should let you do things. It’s like complaining that Linux will let you delete your desktop environment. Some people actually want to delete your desktop environment. You can’t remove that option just because someone can accidentally do it by ignoring all the warnings.

And unfortunately, this means that WG21, the C++ committee, has to take action because people are demanding it

Why does this mean that they have to take action? Why do they need to make C++ memory safe?

C++ was not designed to be memory safe. If you try to make C++ memory safe, you’ll have to break retro compatibility. If you’re going to break retro compatibility, can you say it’s still C++? Or another language called C++2? At that point, why not just use another language that was designed from the start to be memory safe?

The action that should be taken is to completely avoid starting any new project in C++, and let the language die. A programming language is nothing more than a tool, once the tool no longer works, you search for another that does.

C++ should go the way of fortran and cobol. The only development of C++ should be done is to maintain existing huge codebases that would be too expensive to rewrite.

You can just use an unsafe block though. Or make a thin wrapper that is just safe functions that inside just have an unsafe block with the C ABI function.

Even if rust had a stable ABI, you would still need that unsafe block.

I’m not so sure that dynamic libraries always reduces the size. Specially with libraries that are linked by a single binary.

With static libraries, you can conditionally compile only the features you’re gonna use. With dynamic libraries, however, the whole library must be compiled.

EDIT: just to clarify, I’m not saying that static libraries result always in less size. I’m saying that it’s not a black and white issue.

Editor/IDE, whatever. People claim both about jetbrains.

If you want a purely editor-thing:

Whatever vscode does with Ctrl+D (I don’t know the name). Ctrl+D is probably the hotkey I use most in vscode (probably more than Ctrl+S), yet CLion doesn’t have that. I’ve searched multiple times the whole settings for it.

Those two examples are just the ones that most recently occurred to me, it has a lot more issues. For example the lack of a staging area. You can’t “git stage” in CLion.

And I don’t think that the git integration is free from criticism. Git integration is one of the most important features of IDEs. It’s absolutely valid to criticize it.

The autoformatter also doesn’t work correctly when developing in remote. Which means that unless I want my PRs to have thousands of lines of whitespace changes, I can’t use the auto formatter.

Now I don’t know if this is a CMake issue or CLion. But at one point It was "#include"ing a struct from a header file I had deleted 1 hour previous to the build failing. The only way to fix that was to create the file again and delete it again.

These complaints might seem small. But put together they are hours of wasted time that you don’t expect from the “best” of something.

Don’t need to go all the way there. I always heard that jetbrains make the best editors. Yet when my job forced everyone to use CLion I saw that it was just a lie. The editors aren’t good, they are just expensive.

There are 2 easy examples:

1. Remote developing sucks. Loading a remote cmake project takes ages. Yet if you remove the temp directory it’s almost instantaneous. Except when you do it too often and clion refuses to sync the files, then you’re fucked because there isn’t a “sync” button, it only happens automatically.

2. The commit log is awful. It doesn’t by default show you the commit/branch you’ve checked out, it shows the chronologically most recent commit. There’s no “go to checked out commit” button either, you have to write the hash in the search field. Which btw the search is trash. If you write 6 of the characters of the hash it shows “there are no results”, yet when you write the 7th, suddenly your commit appears.

Damn. Alacritty has no features?

I don’t know why you are being so rude. I thought it was the rust community that was known for being toxic?

It’s not my opinion on what the unsafe keyword means. That’s its purpose. Nobody ever wants to write unsafe code on purpose. The unsafe keyword was created to allow safe programs to be created in rust that wouldn’t be accepted by the strict rust compilers.

In a Venn diagram, there are 2 circles: safe programs (1) and programs that are deemed safe by the rust compiler (2).

Circle 2 is smaller than circle 1 and entirely contained inside it. However, there is no reason to not let people write programs from circle 1 that aren’t in circle 2. The unsafe keyword exists to enable programmers to write those programs in rust. However, it comes with a warning, now the programmer is the one responsible for making the program inside circle 1.

A crate having the unsafe keyword doesn’t make the crate unsafe. The unsafe keyword just tells the compiler: “I know that what I’m trying to do may lead to memory safety issues, but I, as the programmer guarantee you that the codeblock as a whole is safe, so turn off some of your checks”.

Using the unsafe keyword in rust is no much different than using a C library in rust.

This entire post is so ignorant it can be summed up in a one paragraph analogy:

“Why do everyone love screwdrivers so much? I drove in nails perfectly with my hammer, but the screwdrivers are so bad at it! Who even designed them? What a horrible design!”

Not related to your question at all, but:

I don’t recommend editing the source code from cargo’s files. Instead, the correct way to modify a dependency would be making a fork and using it as a gift dependency (or path dependency, which is even easier).

Even though they are not what people mean when they say “memory-safe”, it is technically a kind of memory safety. It is unsafe to modify non-mutexed/non-atomic memory that another thread might be modifying at the same time.

Windows 11 is little more than a reskin of windows 10, and they still fucked it up.

Rounded corners are mandatory (Why? I really preferred squared ones). But developers can choose to have their windows square. Why only the developers? Let the user decide how a windows looks like!

And don’t get me started on the start menu. It was a complete massacre. Tiles are gone (am I the only one that liked them?). Instead, now we pin apps to the start menu. Fine I guess, except for the fact that half of the fucking menu is taken up by fucking recomendations. If I remove every single recommendation, instead of having my space back for more pinned programs I get this message: “oh you like this precious white space? If you turned on some recommendations it would show something”. No, i don’t want recommendations, I want my start menu space back. Which btw in windows 10 used to be resizable to whatever size I wanted.

Oh and lets not forget about the volume mixer. Which some genius decided that it was better to keep it 10 clicks away from the user in the settings, instead of conveniently at one click in the taskbar. Which they also made the sound settings their own special taskbar element, instead of another taskbar program. So now if I want to replace their shitty sound settings with the ones I like (trumpet btw), now I would have 2 sound settings in the taskbar, while in win10 I only had 1.

And whose Idea was to join the sound settings and internet settings in the same taskbar button visually? Which is also not the same button functionally. You see, if you press the left side of the button it opens the sound settings, but the right side opens the internet settings. How much do Microsoft UI people get paid?

I guess we got dark notepad, that’s nice.

What’s up with all these posts lately talking as if C was the chain breaker that will let you achieve a higher spiritual level for your soul or some shit. This is at least the second I’ve seen this week.

It’s a programming language. If you want to use it, use it. There is no illuminati pulling in the strings to prevent you from learning this holy language.

That being said, like all programming languages, it’s a tool, with its upsides and downsides. Depending on the project it might be the best choice or the worst. But with the advancement in language design, there’s very little upsides compared to more modern languages, taking into account its big downsides.

Well, game freak is still a Japanese developer. Mario Cart is a very computationally light concept, as usually are Mario games, idk about odyssey in particular though, but they tend to be small maps with small amount of entities each. Zelda is fair, I’ve heard good things about it.

It’s easy to make a good performing game if its concept and art design are computationally light. Optimization is about turning a computationally hard problem into a light algorithm that doesn’t take much resources.

The new Pokemon games grind to a halt if you are in the south of the map and look at the north. Because you are rendering the entire map. How is that optimized to hell and back?

It’s a one line function in an example. It’s a getter.