Oh wonderful. Let's see if I can wrangle things to attend
17.02.2026 09:08
👍 3
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Oh wonderful. Let's see if I can wrangle things to attend
You're in NZ? Welcome! Are you giving any talks near Wellington?
😧
😔
Useful typo
After carefully reading and ranking a record number of 185 submissions from 148 speakers, we finally finished the talk selection for RustWeek 2026!
I'm *really* excited about the lineup! Check it out here: 2026.rustweek.org/blog/2026-02...
Don't forget to buy your ticket! See you in Utrecht!
What the actual f
I don't think that it invalidates the main thrust of your argument, but the large majority of that wealth is in property rather than cash or shares.
Additionally, watercolour is especially tricky because the pigment gets pushed to the edges of what's being worked on as it dries. When painting the sky, it can create harder borders against the clouds, which is sort of the opposite of what we want
FWIW these clouds look lovely (you'll see that when you look at this painting with fresh eyes in a few weeks' time).
I think that they're difficult to paint and draw because they require you to use negative space, which is what is the opposite of what we intuitively do.
Agreed! I have tried very hard to animate code with Manim in a way that I would really like but have always failed. I want to shift groups of characters, but Manim interpolates geometries and it ends up causing a flash rather than something that feels like typing.
".. Common Sense Restrictions Based on Data" has strong "Democratic Republic of ..." vibes
It is a truth universally acknowledged, bicycles give you the freedom that car ads promise.
www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/the-joy-o... @tomflood.bsky.social @cyclingactionnz.bsky.social @nzherald.bsky.social
Do you have any examples of instructional tech videos that you really like?
I'm looking it at increasing the quality of mine and would love to know examples of formats that work well.
I think that this stagnation has more to do with Canonical's enterprise strategy focused on the server than any deliberate decision
They've been watching YT since before they could talk.
You know what this means? It's time to deploy the Pykrete.
Where to from here?
- 📖 Read the full post www.patreon.com/posts/14555...
- 🤔 Comments are very welcome
- 👋 If the algorithm has sent you here, please follow for more
The Axiom level is really fascinating to me. This isn't something that exists in the Rust language, but I suspect that it will emerge. Some parts of Rust are so safe that they essentially require no further review.
In safe Rust:
[More difficult]
- "Semver exempt" APIs
- Unreliable Traits (Eq, Ord)
- Sealed Traits
- Safe Rust (Most safe code lives here)
- Axiom
[Less difficult]
In unsafe Rust land:
[More difficult]
- Raw Assembly
- Pointer Poker (Using raw pointers and type casting to do whatever you want)
- Unsafe (Most unsafe code lives here)
- Partial Initialization
- Like-for-like FFI
- Experimental/Internal API
[Less difficult]
Here a sketch of that spectrum. (For details, click through to the blog post linked to at the start.)
It's not an exhaustive list and many items could be reordered...
Aspects like that mean that coding patterns are more difficult to verify than others. We can use that difficulty quotient as a way to position those patterns along a spectrum.
Consider the Eq, Ord and std::hash::Hash traits.
They're safe, i.e. they're not marked with the unsafe keyword, but they're are allowed to be implemented in a way that can could cause undefined behavior later on if they're relied on by unsafe code.
This all or nothing approach occurs because once undefined behavior is triggered, it's game over for memory safety. Soundness imposes a hard stop.
..but Rust does not have a safe/unsafe binary divide.
The unsafe keyword marks where programmers are given the responsibility to uphold Rust's safety guarantees. Expressed more formally, the soundness guarantees only apply to the safe subset of Rust.
Not all safe Rust code is equally safe.
Here's what that means and why I argue that Rust has a spectrum of safety rather than one that's binary as indicated by the unsafe keyword.
Notes from "Pointer Poker" and more: Levels of safety beyond the safe/unsafe dichotomy www.patreon.com/posts/14555...
Prediction: the next wave of programming languages will just be AI prompts.
Someone's just released ai_bindgen (github.com/germangb/ai...) into the Rust ecosystem, which allows annotation to create functionality with natural language:
What topics? I'm very open to suggestions. Here is my initial sketch:
- Digging into popular crates to see how they work under the hood
- Refactoring "messy" code into idiomatic Rust.
- How to tackle harder stuff: Unsafe, FFI, and so on
What do you think? Any interest? DMs open if that's easier 🙂