DacoTaco

Fuck me haha. And here i am shaking with my 30 pounder haha
I dont use a compound bow though

Oh thats a good idea! Friend of mine and i got a big foam target that is basically one big foam block, but this might be easier to fix after a long time of usage!

How much pounds are those bows?

Exactly the reason why i replaced the one plus x ( which was running a lineageos android 11 build fine ) with the fairphone 4 :D

Eu fairphone 4 user here. Obviously i have none of these issues as phone/network locking isnt a thing here. And im running lineageos and not fully degoogled ( which im ok with ).

But the party trick is very real haha.
I plan to use this phone for at least 8 years as my previous phone, a one plus x, i used for 8 years.

As a software developer i know what iterative development means, its in our blood and brains ( or at least it should be ). Simulations can indeed only get you so far, and i agree sometimes you have to make things and take a plunge. However, and i would like to be really wrong here so correct me if im wrong, but other companies like nasa, do not just shoot shit up in space and hope for the best. They arent allowed to do so for a reason. They test and calculate everything very rigoursly to make sure itll hold up as expected. From thruster power, resistance to continues extreme heat from reentry, …
All of that they do here, on earth, before shooting anything up into space. Otherwise things like the rover on mars would have needed like 20 tries instead of 2.

These are things that looks like spacex is just throwing out the window.
To take it back to software development, they are doing an iterative development ( which is very good for what they are doing! ) but their testing before production/release of software is so basic theyll just see how it responds out there. Thats a huge nono to me if youre going to end up crashing all those rockets in the sea killing a shit ton of nature in the process. Sometimes the means dont justify the costs to me, and this is one of them. Yes, the booster catching was nice to see ( eventhough it nearly ended badly ) and its idea is very good and needed, but the way to get there is…messy.

Specially this. How space x handles failures is a very hard nono in my book. “But we test in the field” is what space x says, and as a software developer its like saying “we test in production”.
Yes youll get something use able faster, but its way way more costly in the long run and is nasty in between.
My arse they cant test this stuff on earth. We have simulations, models, calculations, test, everything. Yes, things can and will sometimes still fail when going in production ( in flight ) but you want to lower the risk of it failing cause its costly as fuck.

They dont seem to care though.

Also, im not saying what they are building towards is bad, it really really isnt, but their methods is… Bad

I think you have things wrong. Any other languages can have libraries be distributed as some format that would allow applications to use it, be it linux/gcc and .a files ( which are actually archives with elf/object files of the code ), or a full on library like .so/.dll.
Rust can only do .o/.dll and only have it expose like a c library afaik. Even .net has improved on the .dll and includes all its language features in it. Rust has none of that. Its not true that libraries not rebuilding are only for closed source. Its also ease of use/access and less problem prone. What if i build my library using a different version of the compiler than you and your application? I could have no problems building my library, while you cant build your application because the library i made gets rebuild and errors.
These errors happen and are all because there is no stable interface/abi and all other languages have overcome this.

Also, by default, nothing in c is rebuild unless it needs to. Thats why the intermediate .o ( elf object ) files exist, so it only has to do the relinking and not recompile and thats why .a archive/libraries in c work, because it doesnt recompile. Unless you meant the fact rust can rebuild part of a file, without recompiling it completely?

I think you dont fully understand how c compilers ( gcc specifically ) work when using multi file projects ( and not just doing gcc input.c -o output.exe ) just how i dont fully know how the rust compiler works. Also, anything using IL will always have an abi, because how else will it jump from code to IL code, so its obvious that rust to wasm will have to abide by that haha. Be it c wasm, c# wasm or rust wasm calling one another. Wasm is wasm, and you only need an exposed interface to call or include the other wasm ( c#/blazor having NativeFileReference in the csproj )

Again, i like the idea of rust, but it has a long way to go to be viable atm. And it has many pitfalls to avoid so it doesnt become the hot mess that is any framework based on node.js

I know that exists, but whats the point of that? You loose all advantages of rust when you use the library then because it cant predict application state with the library code. There is a reason all those rust libraries are compiled locally when you compile a rust application. Its a major lacking point for rust, and as long as it lacks that its dead in the water for big projects.
Again, i like strong type stuff and i like the ideas of rust but it is not grown up enough for me

What is this abi and standard calling methods you speak off? Are you a rust-non-believer or some shit! Rewrite it all in rust, no questions asked!

( i too like the ideas of rust, but without a decent abi or not constantly changing interface, its useless to me. I dont want to rebuild all code, including libraries every time i update 1 library in my application )

Saaaaame. But sometimes even strongly typed stuff wont break on compilation time

Its funny cause its true. I often design tests to be “if a case/enum value is added this test will explode and tell them to add code here”

The looks of the trains made me think belgium, and i dont know the look of the horizon/buildings, so i assumed brussel as well haha

Must be a benelux thing? Same thing here

In the usb world its “host” and “device”, not “master” and “slave”.
But yes you are right

Euh, sword art online s2 exists haha

Haha ye. It is super interesting to see all those OS principals and seeing how nintendo implemented them. Stuff i will never forget either and some design patterns i have implemented in my actual job too

I have. Mostly on embedded devices that have no OS and you need something very specific.

… Or that one time i was reverse engineering a console kernel. I wrote arm asm then. Was actually fun to do tbh

Came here to see a bob comment, was happy to found one haha.
Hungry bob might also be found in an adult entertainment shop though xD

Reporting the bug without fixing it is not repairing the software :p
This is a topic about manufactoring, thats a different thing as its more based on processes and blueprints

Depending on the angle, yes. If its for repairs, then yes. If its for product (manufactoring) improvements, then no. Im a software developer that often collaborates with other teams of open source software. I report, and sometimes fix, bugs so it improves the overal product for everyone. I wouldnt put that under right to repair, as it has nothing to do with repairing it yourself and more with improving a product for everyone by tackling a problem with the product at the source.