I mean it's very lopsided in the sources it accepts.

Huffing Post and Jezebel are acceptable sources?!?

Enable "show dead" in your HN profile settings to observe this discrepancy:

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=jacobin.com

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=mises.org

What data point are we using to suggest Huffington Post and jezebel are unreliable, is there a third party fact checking or ratings agency they should use to determine they are unacceptable?

Wasm is ANYTHING but basic.

Fuck javascript, fuck wasm, fuck html, fuck css.

Rebase it all on XML/XPath/XQuery that way you only need ONE parser, one simple engine.

This whole kitchen sink/full blown OS nonsense needs to end.

Edit: You’re clearly a wasm shill, wasm is an abomination that needs to die.

That sort of bug wouldn’t be caught by rust, and his example of making two return structs and using them in that way would work in C too.

I disagree.

Comments are to explain why, not how.

Links dead, it just goes to the home page and says something about hacker news being neither hackers nor news.

It is archived tho: https://archive.is/5ayjW

To be fair, C++’s modules make no sense, just like their namespaces that span multiple translation units.

It’s just more heavy clunky abstractions for the sake of abstractions.

Modules are an attempt to make part of the language what currently requires a convention:

- A component is a collection of related code.

- The component has an interface and an implementation.

- The interface is a header file (e.g. *.h) that is included (but at most once!) using a preprocessor directive in each dependent component.

- The header file contains only declarations, templates, and explicitly inline definitions.

- The implementation is one or more source files (e.g. *.cpp) that provide the definitions for what is declared in the header, and other unexposed implementation details.

- Component implementations are compiled separately (usually).

- The linker finds compiled definitions for everything a component depends upon, transitively, to produce the resulting program/dll.

So much can go wrong! If only there were a notion of components in the language itself. This way we could just write what we mean ("this is a component, here is what it exports, here are the definitions, here is what it imports"). Then compiler toolchains could implement it however they like, and hopefully optimize it.

It makes lots of sense to anyone used to large scale software development.

It is no accident that Ada, Java, .NET, and oldies like Delphi, Eiffel, Modula-2 and Modula-3 have similar approaches.

Even the way D and Python modules and packages work, or the whole crates and modules approach in Rust.

Naturally folks not used to Web scale don't get these kind of features.

It gets rid of SLS which costs $4 BILLION PER LAUNCH.

It's in part good, but the replacement isn't ready. Without it the whole crewed lunar exploration stack has nothing to ride on.

Lol, this is just nonsense.

This dudes whole account is just propaganda, he should be shadowbanned.

Silicone is plastic, Silicon is the element.

Not according to General Beringer of NORAD! :) [1]

[1] https://youtu.be/iRsycWRQrc8?t=82

Apple started the Clang project buddy, you’ve got your cause and effect backwards.

Yes, because they weren't willing to keep using their GCC fork, for various reason, namely the license (which already made Steve Jobs unhappy once), and being less modular (as per design decision).