> ...) in general, the whole standard library is not thread-safe
yeah this is what Ruby was having issues with all those years ago

Python is also embarrassingly trapped in a Global Interpreter Lock design.

I mean you could do threads, but you'd end up with stuff like @@ static variables beign shared way out of thread scope

"Python has threads, it's just that they can't run in parallel."

I think there was something with Ruby back then where you could end up sharing static variables between *processes*

I seem to remember something like that, like some epic "wtf why" thing with them

People have to learn somewhere (how to create languages and implement them.)

Stroustrup was blessed by working at Bell Labs.

for sure

When he was unsure whether to just make a pre-processor on top of C, or go for a full compiler (given that he had never created a compiler before), his mentors said, "full compiler, dude, go all the way and we will all help."

that's pretty bad ass if you think about it

new modern languages are made by people who took a compilers course and want to make a new langauge that looks cool and uses fewer semicolons

Sounds great, until there's no more funding and the language gets abandoned. Or the version you wrote all your software in, gets deprecated.

or the language isn't completely planned out and just becomes a total mess of unmaintainable half-implementations

Remember D? The "definitive C++ killer", by Walter Bright? Dude is really a genius with regards to compilers, but even he, screwed up and couldn't get it right the first time.

yeah I was actully really into D in the beginning and wrote a few little things in it

but stuff never really worked and pretty much anyone who ported interfaces for it just stopped

He created the first C++ compiler that generated native code (instead of compiling C++ to C), and proposed a bunch of details on the standard, to allow advanced low-level optimizations.

Return Value Optimization, Copy Elision, he invented it.

what do you think of Rust? I checked it out a few times but it was always a mess, and then all the sudden a bunch of stuff is being re-written in it and the head of the project is an insane SJW who's kicking people out who aren't trans minorities

Also, that's one of the things that made C++ a non-deterministic language.

Which makes Programming Language Design professors run away from C++.

that's a good point

It's hard to prove formal properties of code that you don't know *exactly* what's going to do.

Honestly, when a company comes showing "here, we just invented a new language", I see zero value in jumping in early.

If one of the selling points is "it's like C++, but ~~with less features~~ simpler", you can be sure, they'll slowly add these features in later, and pretend they're innovating something.

right, the only reason I got into D was because of Bright and because of the familiarity of a lot of it

Rust I've done like hello world and some little stuff just to see what it was like

honestly what I dislike the most about Rust right now is the community

fuck any project with a CoC I'm weary of now

I started using Mercurial because Mozilla was using it. But I won't touch Rust.

In the early days of the boom of distributed source control, I went through Mercurial, Bazaar, one other that I don't even remember, everyone forgot... later git came about, I tried it too.

well Mozilla could have gone a totally different way if they hadn't chased out Eich

Monotone, that's the one.

never heard of Monotone

never liked Bazaar

Exactly.

used Mercurial for a bit, but Git went crazy and I'm so OSS it seemed silly not to just go full git

we had an SVN sever before that which shit the bed on us and we had to completely re-assemble a really messed up code base

I'm more of a Free Software guy.

Monotone was supposed to be good because it was fast, written in C++. But it turned out Mercurial was virtually just as fast, because most of the time was spent doing I/O, and they did some tricks to optimize I/O.