TehPers

I'm not sure why they're so concerned about their approval ratings. Seems to me that at least 100% of the population would be satisfied with them. Have they conducted a poll?

Rather than modifying your dependencies in the cache directory (which is really not a good idea), consider cloning the repo directly. You can use a patch entry in your Cargo.toml to have all references to iced_wgpu point to your local modified copy.

I'm not going to say that C is unusable by any means (and I'm not saying you are saying that). It's a perfectly usable language. I do think that more people would benefit from exploring other options though. Programming languages are tools, not sports teams. People should familiarize themselves with many tools so they always have a good tool to use for any job.

I think a lot of people believe this because there is some truth to parts of it. I think we see languages like Rust and Zig (and others) popping up to try and solve specific problems better than others.

As for OP's post, there is no single "C successor" or anything like that. People will use the best tool they know of for the job whether that's C, Rust, C++, Zig, Python, C#, etc. Many languages will "replace" C in some projects, and at the same time, C will replace other languages in some projects (likely to a lesser extent though).

(Not /s this time)

Honestly C is the future. I don't know why people would move from C to any other language. It does the job well enough that there's no reason not to use it.

Think about it. Every modern application depends on a piece of code written in C, not Rust or Zig or any other language (except assembly). It can be used to solve any problem, and works in more places than any other language.

These arguments about "security" and "memory safety" are all pointless anyway in the face of modern code scanning tools. Cross-platform dev can be done trivially with preprocessors. If that's not enough, I don't know what to say. Get better at writing C obviously.

Lifetimes and UB should all be kept in mind at all times. You can explicitly mark lifetimes in your C code if you want using comments. Any index-out-of-bounds bugs, use-after-free, etc are just signs that your team needs more training and better code scanning utils. Write more tests!

Anything more complex than a simple typedef is just a sign that you're over-engineering your solution. #include is both simple, and does exactly what you'd expect any reasonable language to do - paste your referenced code inline. It's genius, and doesn't require any complicated explanations on namespaces and classes and subclasses and so on.

So which will be the future? C obviously.

/s

For what it's worth, I feel the same way about normal settings for FP1 in that it's pretty easy. Switching to extreme though, it felt as though I needed to play perfectly to finish a scenario. To me, I think it comes down to most of the difficulty being frontloaded. A solid start sets you up for the rest of the game, while a rough start can ruin a run as the game continues to kick you down with every temp drop, event, etc.

From what I understand, it's Bevy ECS + a custom renderer, and likely some other custom code.

I keep looking at this game not because I want to play it, but because I want to see how it was made. As someone who's played with bevy a bit, it's amazing to me what they were able to do with it, and it would be so cool to see how it was done.

Correct - Rust's attribute grammar allows any parseable sequence of tokens enclosed in #[attr ...] basically. Serde specifically requires things to be in strings, but this is not a requirement of modern Rust or modern versions of syn (if you're comfortable writing your own parser for the meta).

The author is not a Rust expert though, so I'm not surprised to see this assumption. It doesn't take away from the article though.

Edit: for fun, syn has an example parsing an attribute in an attribute

Reddit makes an anti-user change. In other news, grass is green.

I haven't been on the site in over a year and nothing since then has convinced me to go back. Maybe I'm lucky that I'm not in any Reddit-only communities, but it could also just be that I treat those communities as though they don't exist and never had a reason to join one as a result.

Reject assembly, return to machine code. Assembly is an inaccurate projection of what the machine truly does. Writing the binary by hand hardens us, and brings us closer to the computer. We better understand what our machine is doing when we calculate our jumps by hand.

To me, it seems like replacing almost all instances of this with "people" would be a harmless change. Is that something that would work? (Some, like "human emotion", could just become "emotion")

Do you have any specific examples of text that should be changed in the docs?