Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)R

robinm

@ robinm @programming.dev

Posts
2
Comments
133
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I wonder how many fires have been started because people left the pizza box in the oven while trying to keep it warm

    Jump

  • Cardboards are actually quite good at heat insulation. If you have an electric oven (no flame) and put the temperature below 200°C (ignition is at a slighly higher temperature but oven aren't precise), there is no risk. So you can totally reheat pizza at 180°C on its cardboard.

  • When a Programmer Holds the Code Hostage: The costs of a policy of appeasement

    Jump

  • That's well written. I think that requiered 2+ code review could also help because with time more people will gain knowledge of the dark parts of the codebase, just by reviewing the PR of “Martin” when he work on them.

  • What benefits do you get for being on-call? - programming.dev

    Jump

  • Same in France

  • What would it take for you to move away from Github?

    Jump

  • Lol. I read “Other oysters gaining more popularity”, and found it very appropriate !

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • Just a remark. C++ has exactly the same issues. In practice both clang and gcc have good ABI stability, but not perfect and not between each other. But in any cases, templates (and global mutable static for most use cases) don't works throught FFI.

  • What are some commonly known facts that are too bizarre for you to believe to be true?

    Jump

  • IIRC the orbit of Mercure doesn't work with Newton Model, and astronomers were predicted the discovery of Vulcain a small planet between Mercure and the Sun. So a new model had to be invented since Vulcain couldn't be found.

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • Nothing prevent you to use dynamic linking when developping and static linking with aggressive LTO for public release.

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • Someone found the link to the article I was thinking about.

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • Thank you so much. I read this when it was written, and then totally forgot where I read those information.

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • Shared libraries save RAM.

    Citation needed :) I was surprised but I read (sorry I can't find the source again) that in most cases dynamic linking are loaded 1 time, and usually very few times. This make RAM gain much less obvious. In addition static linking allows inlining which itself allow aggressive constant propagation and dead code elimination, in addition to LTO. All of this decrease the binary size sometimes in non negligeable ways.

  • How important is the option for dynamic linking (vs static linking) in the modern day?

    Jump

  • I think you don't understand what @CasualTee said. Of course dynamic linking works, but only when properly used. And in practice dynamic linking in a few order of magnitude more complex to use than static linking. Of course you still have ABI issue when you statically link pre-compiled libraries but in practice in statically linked workflow you are usually building the library yourself removing all ABI issues. Of course if a library is using a global and you statically linked it two times (with 2 differents versions) you will have an issue, but at least you can easily check that a single version is linked.

    There are no problems other than versioning and version conflicts, and even that is a solved problem.

    If it was solved, “DLL hell” wouldn't be a common expression and docker would have never been invented.

    You get into all kind of UB when interacting with a separate DSO, especially since there are minimal verification of the ABI compatibility when loading a dynamic library.

    This statement makes no sense at all. Undefined behavior is just behavior that the C++ standard intentionally did not imposed restrictions upon by leaving the behavior without a definition. Implementations can and do fill in the blanks.

    @CasualTree was talking specically of UB related to dynamic linking and whitch simply do not exists when statically linking.

    Yes dynamic linking work in theory, but in practice it's hell to make it work properly. And what advantage does it have compare to static linking?

    • Less RAM usage? That not even guaranteel because static linking allow aggressive inlining, constant propagation, LTO and other fun optimisation
    • Easier dependencies upgrade? That's mostly true for C, assuming you have perfect backward ABI compatibility. And nothing proves you that your binary is really compatible with newer versions of its libraries. And staticdependencies ungrade are an issue only because most Linux distribution don't have a workflow in witch updating a dependancy triggers the rebuil of all dependant binaries. If it was done it would then just be a question of download speed. Given the popularity of tools like docker who effectively tranforms dynamic linking into the equivalent of statically linking since all dependencies' versions are known, I would say that a lot of people prefer the confort of static linking.

    To sum-up, are all the complications introduced specifically introduced by dynamic linking compared to static linking worth it for a non-guaranteed gain in RAM, a change in the tools of Linux maintainors and extra download time?

  • This Week in Rust 511

    Jump

  • Thoughts on (semi-)automated tool to import content from /r/rust to this community?

    Jump

  • It seems to be a lot of work but could also be a good idea.

    Something that I would like would also be a statement on the Rust blog to say that lemmy instance X is the main Rust lemmy instance and discussion should mostly be done here, so that the migration path is clear for reddit users.

  • Common Rust Lifetime Misconceptions (2020)

    Jump

  • That's a very nicecly written article.

    Just a quick question, isn't point 8 outdated (misconctption: “Rust borrow checker does adanced liftime analysis”) due to the introduction NLL (no lexical lifetime) in Rust 2018?

  • C++ Member Functions vs. Free Functions

    Jump

  • Pimpl for Small Classes

    Jump

  • If only std::unique_ptr and std::variant were introduced in C++ it would be possible to use the default destructor, copy and move constructor…

    That article would have been useful 15 years ago, but not anymore.

  • C++ Member Functions vs. Free Functions

    Jump

  • What are your programming hot takes?

    Jump

  • That being said, if you access the database in GUI there is a high chance that you will repeat yourself making the whole program bigger.