I understand that the macro only affects compile time but I’m talking about the extra function that’s included in the resulting source code when the macro is expanded during compile. Based on other feedback, it looks like the unused function is optimized away.
This was a great post, but is the last state of the macro actually bad for performance in any way? I get that it’s ugly (and we should only choose to make code less readable like this when there’s actually an issue) but is it worse for runtime performance?
Even if you were using the builder pattern, this maintains the immutable variable in the parent scope while you use the mutable variable’s builder pattern methods (basically exactly as my example demonstrates) in the inner scope.
edit: Oh, I think you mean you would chain the builder pattern calls and assign it to an immutable variable. Sure, that makes sense if you own the struct.
I prefer to encapsulate a mutable reference to the instance in a scope.
let post_form = {
let mut post_form = PostInsertForm::new(
// your constructor arguments
);
post_form.some_mutating_method(
// mutation arguments
);
post_form
};
This way you’re left with an immutable instance and you encapsulate all of the logic needed to setup the instance in one place.
The Majority Report. It’s awesome. https://m.youtube.com/@TheMajorityReport
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
What did he whisper in her ear?
The runoff voting downside is incorrect, the “drag the voters up to yellow and watch how it makes red win” example. This is not “see how making yellow more popular makes yellow lose”. It’s actually “see how making red more popular than yellow makes red win”. The movement of the voters is not for yellow, but for red and yellow in a way that gives more voters to red.
There is no way for yellow to be the only candidate to get a boost of voters in the demo. If there were, it would only demonstrate further that yellow would still continue to win.
Runoff voting is the way.
He gave them the weapons and is STILL giving them weapons today knowing exactly how they’re being used. “We’re trying to hard to stop this” while handing them the bombs they need to continue uninterrupted.
They say it just tastes better. idk. I’m going to try it soon.
Someone just suggested to me that I should be putting my chocolate bars in the freezer first. I’ve never heard of this, but apparently it’s a thing that I’ve been missing out on for a while.
So I guess I’m the one who can’t believe that I don’t do it.
After watching Pocahontas for the first time in many years, it shocked me that anyone could value personal wealth over coexisting. The antagonist only cares about mining out gold, looking at the hills as having potential as opposed to perceiving them as implicitly valuable as they are. Nature is worth protecting.
Why would a Rust compiler written in C be more trustworthy than one written in Rust?
If the idea is that, in an ideal world, we would compile each layer of compilers from assembly-up-to-Rust for each build, that seems even more risky as then you have to trust each compiler instead of just one.
I’m still lost on why they’re doing it.
The idea that someone would introduce the verbiage “garbage collection” in the context of Rust is crazy to me. I hope they change that to “file cleanup” or… anything else.
I save “template” SQL queries in a special directory so that I don’t have to google how to do specific things. It’s basically my own personal “examples” folder.
Who is writing SQL in the terminal?
AI is surprisingly helpful with providing a starting point. When you want a helloworld app, an example of how to use some part of a crate, or a code snippet showing how to take what you have and do something unusual with it, AI is super useful.
I would love to be able to get the same quality of AI locally as I do from ChatGPT. If that’s possible, please let me know. I’ve got two 3090s ready to go.
But for now, I’m just enjoying the fact that ChatGPT is free. Once they put up a pay wall, it’s back to suffering (or maybe/probably trying out some open-source models).
There are some people who both start and end every gun debate with the “good guy with a gun” argument. Nothing gets through the impenetrable logic of “it makes sense to me”.
The aliens haven’t yet consumed our planet in this timeline. Consider yourself lucky.