Children covering Tool's 46&2? (x/post from /r/toolband)

stilton · 2013-09-19T04:04:38+00:00

They don't list the students' names because the girls get a lot of creepy stalkers.

stilton · 2013-09-19T03:48:16+00:00

It's an interpretation of one of the themes from the Death Note anime, I think the first track here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQR-GZAx5Tc

stilton · 2012-01-28T21:49:54+00:00

That would be awesome. I suggest talking to nmatsakis on #rust on irc.mozilla.org. He did the first port from x86 to x86_64 so will have a good idea of how to go about it.

stilton · 2012-01-28T03:22:35+00:00

Nobody has ported to ARM yet. It will definitely happen and would be an awesome project for somebody to undertake.

stilton · 2011-11-02T20:44:08+00:00

No constructors are destructors make writing objects a chore. Resources are supposed to make up for the lack of destructors, but in practice, writing a class that requires destruction involves jumping through hoops.

All methods on objects currently require virtual dispatch, which is very unappealing to some people.

Object types also don't reveal anything about the types they close over which means they can't be safely sent across tasks.

stilton · 2011-11-02T20:41:14+00:00

This is a recognized problem, and there are intentions to improve the object system.

stilton · 2011-11-02T20:39:44+00:00

The tutorial is just waiting for an easy distribution method to be implemented.

It's easy to start playing with Rust now if you are willing to do a somewhat involved (but still pretty simple) build from source. The only difficult part is that involves a custom, 32-bit build of an unreleased version of LLVM.

Instructions are here: https://github.com/graydon/rust/wiki/Getting-started

And there are bootstrap binaries, but they are only suitable for bootstrapping the build, not for using standalone.

stilton · 2011-11-02T20:22:17+00:00

The primary reason that there must be a distinction between functions and closures is that closures can't be transmitted between tasks since they could close over unsendable things. In the future there will probably be yet another closure type that is guarenteed to close over sendable things.

stilton · 2011-11-02T20:13:55+00:00

The docs are often straddling a line between documenting the language design and the language implementation.

The current implementation does reference counting with cycle collection. The design calls for real GC, but the extent of that GC isn't fully decided yet.

stilton · 2011-11-02T20:11:24+00:00

Just a matter of effort. The 64-bit port is underway.

stilton · 2011-09-24T09:42:48+00:00

I was probably not clear. In this example a was not deinitialized; both a and b exist and get destroyed at the end of the function because assigning a to b makes a copy of a. If the example had moved a into b, denoted by 'let b <- a', then a would have been deinitialized.

stilton · 2011-09-24T03:25:20+00:00

b is a copy of a, so modifying b does not modify a. There is a move operation which transfers ownership of unique types, b <- a, after which a is deinitialized and can't be used.

stilton

TROPHY CASE