> Says frustrating things like "so I can just use unsafe", because no you don't and if you do I would reject your changes immediately.
This is the kind of hostility (which is frankly toxic) that’s become associated with parts of the Rust community, and has fairly or not, driven away many talented people over time.
> Rust invented the concept of ownership as a solution memory management issues without resorting to something slower like Garbage Collection or Reference Counting.
This is plain wrong, and it undermines the credibility of the author and the rest of the piece. Rust did not invent ownership in the abstract; it relies on plain RAII, a model that predates Rust by decades and was popularized by C++. What Rust adds is a compile-time borrow checker that enforces ownership and lifetime rules statically, not a fundamentally new memory-management paradigm.
> It actually took a lot longer to re-write the game in C++ than it took me to write the original machine code version 20 years earlier.
Is the most interesting quote IMO. I often feel like productivity has gone down significantly in recent years, despite tooling and computers being more numerous/sophisticated/fast.
It was nighttime in Singapore when the ruling was announced. My husband and I scrambled to find a flight back. The best we could find, at any price, lands 25mins after the deadline.
It’s really the hardware block size that matters in this case (direct I/O). That value is a property of the hardware and can’t be changed.
In some situations, the “logical” block size can differ. For example, buffered writes use the page cache, which operates in PAGE_SIZE blocks (usually 4K). Or your RAID stripe size might be misconfigured, stuff like that. Otherwise they should be equal for best outcomes.
In general, we want it to be as small as possible!
This is the kind of hostility (which is frankly toxic) that’s become associated with parts of the Rust community, and has fairly or not, driven away many talented people over time.