banning patients

Did you mean patents?

If you think this is normal then imagine what other people think of the linux community though!

But here’s the issue: the parent comment didn’t even provide reasons why they think Windows sucks or examples/episodes where this was a problem for them. It adds nothing to the discussion, just free hate.

Zig is “c”, but modern and safe.

Zig is safer than C, but not on a level that is comparable to Rust, so it lacks its biggest selling point. Unfortunately just being a more modern language is not enough to sell it.

So imagine if trying to fit in a C-like cousin failed

C++ was not added to Linux because Linus Torvalds thought it was an horrible language, not because it was not possible to integrate in the kernel.

It also seems to require a GC though…

newxml is GC only, for simplicity sake.

Pointers are not guaranteed to be safe

So I guess they are forbidden in @safe mode?

but it’s being replaced by something else instead

Do you know what is the replacement? I tried looking up DIP1000 but it only says “superceded” without mentioning by what.

This makes me wonder how ready D is for someone that wants to extensively use @safe though.

For local variables, one should use pointers, otherwise ref does references that are guaranteed to be valid to their lifetime, and thus have said limitations.

Should I take this to mean that pointers instead are not guaranteed to be valid, and thus are not memory safe?

Note that Rust does not “solve” memory management for you, it just checks whether yours is memory safe. Initially you might rely on the borrow checker for those checks, but as you become more and more used to Rust you’ll start to anticipate it and write code that already safisfies it. So ultimately you’ll still learn how to safely deal with memory management, just in a different way.

Rust for Linux used to be developed in parallel to the mainline Linux before Linus Torvalds merged support in the main tree.

“safe by default” can be done by starting your files with @safe:

Last time I heard about that it was much more limited than Rust, for example it even disallowed taking references to local variables. Has something changed since then?

But the one time I looked at a rust git repo I couldn’t even find where the code to do a thing was.

IMO that tells more about how the project was organized and names things than the language used.

So I think probably, the best way IS to go the way linus did. Just go ahead and write a very basic working kernel in rust. If the project is popular it will gain momentum.

As the other commenter pointed out, there’s Redox. The issue is that this completly disregards an incremental approach: you have to rewrite everything before it comes usable, you can’t do it piece by piece. Currently the approach of Rust for Linux is not even to rewrite things, but to allow writing new drivers in Rust.

Trying to slowly adapt parts of the kernel to rust and then complain when long term C developers don’t want to learn a new language in order to help isn’t going to make many friends on that team.

Have you seen the conference video? That’s not just refusal to learn a new language, it’s open hostility. And it’s not the only instance, for example Asahi Lina also reported unreasonable behaviour by some maintainers just because she wrote Rust code, even when Rust was not involved.

That doesn’t really excuse its behavior in the video though.

Gnome 47 will have support for accent colors if that’s what you want.

Does GNOME really need an app to change the theme?

You can also do what this app does manually. The point is that “themes” are an hack and not officially supported, as such it doesn’t make sense to provide an official interface to set them.

KDE plasma has this natively…

Do you mean for global themes, application styles or plasma styles? All application styles I can find either use Kvantum or require you to compile them manually…

Software implementations of those features is often slower, and runtime checking can often be too expensive compared to the gains.

since it seems like nobody but cachy or custom kernel runs anything but V1

Gentoo offers x86_64-v4 binary builds too.

There was a proposal for Fedora too, though it was ultimately rejected.

Ultimately the gains right now seem to be only 1-3%, though that might also be because there’s not much demand for these kind of optimizations. If more distros enable them they might become more widespread and the benefits might increase too. It’s a chicken-egg problem though.

Emails are nowhere near being competitive with discord. Sure, they’re technically more accessible, but in practice they are much less usable by random people which in turn will just avoid interacting or contributing with your project.

High or low level doesn’t matter. Mathematically it just makes more sense to use 0-based indexing https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD831.html

Can’t those be installed in toolbox?

Metro UI toggle buttons were rectangular though.

GNOME devs never said that theming is incompatible (just “not supported”), and you’re still not explaining whay you mean with “incompatible” either. Managing window controls also doesn’t seem a requirement to be “compatible”, as the app still runs fine even with client side decorations (again, it just won’t fit visually with the rest of the system).

And by the way, the problem is not theming per-se, but the fact that apps get themed by default, they inevitably break by default, and app developers are left to deal with that. Nobody ever tried to improve the situation so the solution they came up with is to have their apps always look the same.

How about when the theming is baked in and impossible to change?

It can still be changed, it’s just a harder to do so.

It’s about doing things that go against the interests of the user.

This conveniently ignores that app developers are also users of ui frameworks, and they would like a well defined platform to test for, rather than an endless stream of distros each with its own theme that could break their app.