Always check your programs on -O0 or pay the price

Shit gets really fun when you find out your code is a edge case for compiler optimization and should never be optimized away (although this is very very rare for -O2)

No there is not. Borrow checking and RAII existed in C++ too and there is no formal axiomatic proof of their safety in a general sense. Only to a very clearly defined degree.

In fact, someone found memory bugs in Rust, again, because it is NOT soundly memory safe.

Dart is soundly Null-safe. Meaning it can never mathematically compile null unsafe code unless you explicitly say you're OK with it. Kotlin is simply Null safe, meaning it can run into bullshit null conditions.

The same thing with Rust: don't let it lull you into a sense of security that doesn't exist.

Ignoring warnings is really not a good way to deal with it. If a compiler is bitching about something there is a reason to.

A lot of times the devs are too overworked or a little underloaded in the supply of fucks to give, so they ignore them.

In some really high quality codebases, they turn on "treat warnings as errors" to ensure better code.

In order to grow from failure one must learn to fail

That first lesson was so hard to learn

Teach him to fail. Those kids are afraid of failing because somewhere in life someone traumatized them so they don't like to ever fail at anything.

Yeah sorry if I'm not "intelligent enough" to literally see KKKamala throw trans rights under the bus to court the right, or the Democrats shit stance on LGBT, and somehow swallow the pinkwashing nonsense

Democrats and Republicans are the two wings of the Reichsadler

OP is a Democrat stooge. Look at comment history.

I miss it still.

YES, BASED

IN THIS HOUSE WE COMMIT TO MASTER

Master. I find the whole "reasoning" behind the controversy absolute horseshit peddled by nontechnical people on the sidelines