FizzyOrange

joined 11 months ago
[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 2 points 5 days ago

One nice thing about XML is that there's an official way to link to the schema from within the document. If you do that you can easily automatically validate it, and even better you get fantastic IDE support via Red Hat's LSP server. Live validation, hover for keys, etc.

It's a really nice experience and JSON schema can't really match it.

That said, XML just has the wrong data model for 99% of use cases.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 6 points 5 days ago (2 children)

That appears to not support comments. How they made that mistake after JSON is a mystery.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 7 points 5 days ago

Make sense. Firmware is also extra difficult to debug so it's nice to use a language that significantly reduces the amount of debugging you need to do.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 4 points 5 days ago

Looks interesting. Linux ABI compatibility is a herculean task though. Probably on the order of writing a web browser or a MS Word compatible word processor.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 4 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Would you rather build from wood or tissue paper?

What glue is better: 2 part epoxy or pritt stick?

Do you prefer soap or ash as a cleaning agent?

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 7 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Sure there aren't many things that are universally loved. I mean I can't really think of anything that doesn't have some flaw.

But that doesn't mean everything is equal! What would you rather program with, Visual Basic or Go? PHP or Typescript? If you polled people there are obvious winners.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think either is probably fine. Apparently the French stress the syllables equally, not just the second so it's a minor difference.

Actually I just listened to the French pronunciation and it sounds more like they do stress the first syllable to me:

https://youtu.be/fN1VwDpxbXQ?si=1VcffgqbwRelS8zY

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 37 points 6 days ago (2 children)

They're being diplomatic. From Wikipedia:

The name "Godot" was chosen due to its relation to Samuel Beckett's play Waiting for Godot, as it represents the never-ending wish of adding new features in the engine, which would get it closer to an exhaustive product, but never will.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 41 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (16 children)

Yeah except it's named after the play so it's definitely pronounced God-oh. I think people just mispronounce it Go-dot if they haven't heard of the play. Looking at you Mr Linus Tips.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Think of it from the company's point of view. If you're hiring a new employee then the options for a good candidate are a) move jobs and work for you, b) move jobs and work for someone else. You're competing with other companies.

If you're reviewing an existing salary for a good employee their options are a) do nothing and accept the shitty raise, b) move jobs and work for someone else.

Moving jobs has significant cost for most people - it's time consuming, stressful, might involve moving house, etc.

That downside gives employees who haven't proven they are looking for a new job a significant negotiating disadvantage.

If you really want you can tell your boss you are actively looking for new jobs. That will increase your chances of getting a bigger raise, but of course it has other downsides so most people don't do that.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 23 points 6 days ago (10 children)

Rust is the obvious answer, though I dunno how suitable it really is for games - the most popular game engine is Bevy and I'm not sure I like it too much. Also there seems to be much more focus on game technology than making actual games.

Don't worry about it being "functional" though. It did support lots of FP features but the typical style is much more like imperative C++ than Haskell.

I would also look into Zig though.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Languages that make use of references rather than pointers don’t have this Dualism.

It's not about references vs pointers. You could easily have a language that allowed "null references" (edit: too much C++; of course many languages allow null references, e.g. Javascript) or one that properly separated null pointers out in the type system.

I agree with your point though, using a special Null value is usually worse than using Option or similar. And nullptr_t doesn't help with this at all.

view more: ‹ prev next ›