C++ doesn't do quick and dirty either. That's why experienced game developers combine a core engine written in a high-performance language (C++, Rust, C#), with a scripting language (Lua, Python, hand-rolled).
That approach gives you the best of both worlds: high-performance core with high-velocity iterations for gameplay. Don't use Rust or C++ for scripting... madness lies that way.
C++ will easily let you write non-thread-safe code anywhere, won't complain about multiple mutable pointers to the same object, will let you leave pointers dangling and resources leaked.
Such code is of course crappy, but the OP wants to test if things are fun before committing to implementing them properly. Rust wants things done properly on the first try (which usually is a good thing, except throw-away prototypes).
"CHR is very new and experimental feature of the engine, it is based on wildly unsafe functionality which could result in memory corruption, subtle bugs, etc."
I also think that doc page is a little old. The feature is over 2 years old now and hot reloading is inherently "unsafe" in any compiled language. It's just letting you know that Rust's safety guarantees might go out the window if there are bugs in the code that handles hot-reloading.
Funnily enough, Mojang is on that list, and I remember recently watching a video[1] of Notch hot-reloading code while developing Minecraft, except it was with Java and I'm sure he didn't pay a dime for the ability to do that.
The code itself looks very straightforward, two preconditions and a loop. I don't see any significant difference in terms of complexity compared to any other low-level systems programming language. It's obviously a bit more verbose than python or haskell, but those are not targeting the same audience.
Rust is a significantly more productive language than C. It's not even a comparison.
Proof: Asahi Lina wrote an entire driver for a modern GPU, with zero reported runtime crashes, and explicitly stated this would have been impossible in C.
You don't need a citation. You can see from their actions. And China isn't going to come out and say this anyway. But the leaders of the country know what the results would be, and still they continue with an aggressive posture vs Taiwan and the U.S.
Are you referring to the entirely debunked theory that human social lives resemble those of wolves in captivity, which is now resonating in incel circles, and that even the original author has been trying to correct for decades?
Unless you meant alpha male as in furries, in which case furries fathering all the children is an interesting point of view.
Forgive me if I'm reaching, but as a fellow survivor I would highly recommend seeking therapy, my friend.
It sounds as if you are letting an experience with a horrible human being influence your life post-separation. Noone should have such port over you, especiay not narcissists, liers and abusers.
Not dating for a while is actually a healthy response. Work on your self, get your emotional world in order, and you'll become stronger and happier.
There are wonderful people out there, worth sharing your life with. I'm glad I said no to abuse, worked on my shit and and didn't give up.
Word for word the same here. I remember spending hours and hours in the silentpcreview forums looking for the latest and greatest in silent fan technology.
Ask a human the same question and force them to answer (instead of saying I don't know), and they will hallucinate a list of references for you just the same. Does that mean humans are not intelligent?
I don't think your argument proves what you claim.
One could argue that humans will say "I don't know" when they don't know, but that ultimately depends on training. We currently don't have LLMs trained to answer "I don't know" (I suspect that in part that's due to incentives of focusing on something that looks impressive; one could argue that if an AI system too often says "I don't know" it's less impressive albeit it may be more useful since you can rely upon it more when it says it knows)
There are plenty of cases where humans are trained to hope they sound convincing even if they make up answers. I've seen a fair share of this done by students.
This was my goto argument when people without technical background were laughing about ChatGPTs bullshit generation (before it was called hallucinating).
Put a gun to Einsteins head and force him to answer any question you ask him without hesitating or denying an answer.
This is not an argument for stating LLMs like ChatGPT are intelligent (it is not, but not for any of the reasons i have read about so far anywhere). But the hallucinations definitely don't show anything about intelligence. Actually, if they did, they would actually indicate intelligence rather than not. So, quite the opposite which should be very obvious.
That approach gives you the best of both worlds: high-performance core with high-velocity iterations for gameplay. Don't use Rust or C++ for scripting... madness lies that way.