• 0 Posts
  • 7 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: May 19th, 2024
  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtoOpen Source@lemmy.ml•We are misunderstanding the strenghts of open source
    5·
    2 months ago

    a more boilerplate way to remove having to worry about designing the UI/UX so I could focus on [blank]

    Yes.

    In a way, it is super funny ironic / funny to me that we have basically no actual GUI standard. There is Qt, there is stuff with html/css/js, and the rest just lack tons of features.

    No idea how it works on windows tbh.

    Making a cli app? Sure, easy peasy, done in 5 mintues. Making a small GUI app? Strap in for 2 weeks of basics how this framework chose to solve certain issues. It’s funny from that point of view.

  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtolinuxmemes@lemmy.world•I see the Reddit hivemind has arrivedDeutsch
    5·
    6 months ago

    idk, I’ve been using xubuntu for more than 10 years now, I’m not happy with absolutely everything, but the trouble I do have is definitely less effort to fix than learning a new, more elaborate distro.

    So, it’s a pretty good, common denominator, and as long as it keeps working it doesn’t really need to be anything else?

    I’m sure there are differences and niches that other distros fulfill better, but until there is a killer feature I’m interested in that only works on a specific distro or works extremely well on a different distro, I don’t see the “push” factor that would make me leave?

    (btw, that there is no “report bugs here” button that’s just built into the window manager (besides the -,+,x buttons) and takes me to project home pages or bug trackes is wild to me, on any distro as far as I know. Like they don’t want to interact with users? I don’t get it.)

  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtoLinux@lemmy.ml•One Of The Rust Linux Kernel Maintainers Steps Down - Cites "Nontechnical Nonsense"English
    52·
    10 months ago

    At the cost of sounding naive and stupid

    It may be a naive question, but it’s a very important naive question. Naive doesn’t mean bad.

    The answer is that that is not possible, because the compiler is supposed to translate the very specific language of C into mostly very specific machine instructions. The programmers who wrote the code, did so because they usually expect a very specific behavior. So, that would be broken.

    But also, the “unsafety” is in the behavior of the system and built into the language and the compiler.

    It’s a bit of a flawed comparison, but you can’t build a house on a foundation of wooden poles, because of the advantages that wood offers, and then complain that they are flammable. You can build it in steel, but you have to replace all of the poles. Just the poles on the left side won’t do.

    And you can’t automatically detect the unsafe parts and just patch those either. If we could, we could just fix them directly or we could automatically transpile them. Darpa is trying that at the moment.