Arguably mapping out cities to this degree across the globe is a ginormous effort, on an order of magnitude more so than what Google Maps etc. currently provide. Thus I don’t think it’s entirely unreasonable to try designing something that operates purely in terms of sensory input (and of course map data where available, those approaches don’t have to be mutually exclusive).
What I mean is that you (IIUC) can’t use an AGPL library in a GPL app without relicensing the whole thing to AGPL. For many larger projects relicensing is a huge hassle and often a non-starter if there aren’t very good reasons for it.
“just don’t enforce it” probably isn’t enough for most companies and projects
A good reason to pick GPL is if you want to allow GPL software to integrate yours and you don’t care that much about the AGPL clauses (e.g. because your app isn’t a server).
CC0 might be a good fit for trivial template repos where you don’t want to burden downstream projects with having to include copyright notices.
Also the iOS SDK isn’t freely available, so you’d have to copy that out of an Xcode installation… but given enough time and effort, you could almost certainly hack together a cross-compilation config for Clang that compiles an unsigned iOS app on Linux. Signing it might in fact be the bigger issue, since I’m not aware of any tools that sign Mach-O binaries on Linux.
Should also be noted that macOS does support Bluetooth File Transfer natively, so they did already implement it elsewhere.
JS is fine, it’s more that people overdo it and bundle their heavy, deeply layered frameworks with thousands of npm dependencies for the web. Often times analytics/tracking/ad libraries are a major contributor of bloat, I once shrunk down a package-lock from thousands of lines to a few hundred just by stripping the telemetry libraries from an open-source app.
Use the right tool for the job. Sometimes it’s a static page, sometimes a server-rendered dynamic page and sometimes a single-page application, all of those can be made performant.
Having the ability to overload functions or constructors without a million Stuff::with_x variants is something I consider more ergonomic and not unsafe. I know the Rust community prefers explicitness in many places, but explicitness and safety are somewhat orthogonal in language design. I consider e.g. Swift to be a safe and ergonomic/sugared language, that borrows, no pun intended, a lot of ideas from Rust
As long as you limit yourself to a subset of modern C++, it’s actually a decent language. Less guardrails than Rust, but more syntactic sugar (think overloading, default parameters, implicit this, implicit reference-taking, implicit conversions). You could argue those are anti-features, but even as someone who really likes Rust, I gotta admit C++ is occasionally more ergonomic.
VSCode + CodeLLDB is great (and FOSS), surprised no one mentioned this yet
Seriously. There are a lot of parallels between GPUs (or NPUs for ML inference) and quantum processors in terms of being architected towards a more specialized form of computation and I could totally see QPUs being a thing in the future, probably mostly for number cruncing (see Grover/Shor’s algorithms). Though if Grover search suddenly becomes the way of quickly searching for files or something, who knows, maybe this might be more useful for general computing than we think.
In the 80s no one thought computers would be something normal people would use at home, they were seen as a tool for mathematicians and nerds. Now look at the world today. Who knows what the future will hold.
I know a bunch of larger C++ apps that use vcpkg for cross-platform (Windows/macOS/Linux) builds of their dependencies and it seems to work pretty well
When case insensitivity is the default I always wonder how many apps unknowingly rely on that due to typos somewhere. I encountered this once while porting a Windows/macOS app to Linux that someone imported a module with the wrong case and nobody noticed
Tbh rust-analyzer is still pretty great. What bothers me more is that Kotlin is pretty much the only language without an official language server, because it doesn’t align with their business interests…
It’s opt-in in Swift 5 mode and opt-out in Swift 6 mode, the Swift 6 compiler supports both modes though and lets you migrate a codebase on a module-by-module basis.
Agree that opt-in sort of defeats the point, but in practice it’s a sort of unavoidable compromise (and similar to unsafe Rust there will always be escape hatches)
Swift does have data race safety as of Swift 6 with their actor-based concurrency model and are introducing noncopyable types/a more sophisticated ownership model over the next few releases
Swift fits the description too
Not that specific tbh, most newer native languages these days are compiled and memory safe (Rust, Swift, Go, Kotlin Native, etc)
Coming from Haskell, OCaml always felt a bit strange to me. The double semicolons, the inconsistency in the standard library between curried and uncurried functions etc. Maybe I’m confusing it with Standard ML though, can’t remember.
In both cases, checkout updates your working tree (by checking out either all or just some files from a commit), just when you’re switching branches it moves your HEAD pointer too