FizzyOrange

I think you're being way too harsh.

1. His recommendations to disable debug info and PIC are not "bad". He isn't suggesting that should be the default. He actually only suggested that split debug info should be made the default on Linux which is a sensible suggestion.
2. There are gazillions of other posts talking about codegen-units, cranelift and so on. I don't think we need a repeat (though he could have linked to them).

The focus on linking was because this post is introducing his liker project.

OP ignore this naysayer.

Difficult pronunciation and it also sounds like a lame "cool" name that a super nerd would think of.

would not be considered bugs but maybe change requests.

That's just playing with semantics. They are clearly bugs. They are literally called "defect reports".

Without a spec how would you argue that a system/product is safe?

1. Lots of testing, including randomised testing and ideally formal verification.
2. Comprehensive test coverage - both code coverage (lines, branches) and functional coverage (hand written properties).
3. Functional safety features (ECC, redundancy, error reporting & recovery, etc.)
4. Engineering practices known to reduce the chance of bugs (strong static types, version control, CI & nightly tests, rigorous engineering processes - requirement tracking and so on, and yes ideally well written specifications for all the tools you are using).

There are many aspects to safety and it's definitely a good idea to have a spec for a language, but it doesn't automatically mean safety is impossible without it.

Software in itself cannot be safe or unsafe because without hardware it cannot do anything.

The nice thing about abstraction is that you can talk about software without considering the hardware, more or less. If one says "this software is safe", it means it's safe assuming it's running on working hardware.

It doesn't always hold up - sometimes the abstraction leaks, e.g. for things like spectre and rowhammer. And there are sometimes performance concerns. But it's pretty good.

you can say that without a spec as well but what does “wrong” mean then? It just means you personally disagree with its behavior.

Nope. Specs can have bugs. Here are the bugs in the C++ spec for example:

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_toc.html

As I said, specifications are useful and desirable, but the SIL's dogmatic "no spec = unsafe" is clearly not based in reality.

It's not because we have tested this program extensively on every C++ compiler, but because the language rules of C++ say so.

Debatable. Saying things in a prose specification doesn't magically make them happen. Tests and reference models can though.

I also don't really agree with the SIL requirements that languages need to have rigorous specifications to be safe. Clearly it's better if they do, but would your rather fly on a rocket controlled by C code or Rust code?

IMO a specification would be really nice to have, but it main purpose is to tick a certification checkbox, which is why the only one that exists was written specifically for that purpose.

Dunno why you're being downvoted. It's very obviously deliberately chosen to make 12 year olds giggle.

Krita is quite far ahead of GIMP at this point. I'm not a pro Photoshop user but if you are and you're looking at alternatives, that's the place to look.

RPI 256GB -> 512GB upgrade: $15

Mac Mini 256GB -> 512GB upgrade: £200!??

Eesh I mean I am at peace with price differentiation but that is wild.

I think there are some crates that wrap the unsafe code for you, e.g. https://github.com/rodrimati1992/abi_stable_crates/ (I haven't ever tried it).

He is. By using statically linked binaries.

Technically this is conflating two things: bundling dependencies and static/dynamic linking. But since you have to bundle your dependencies to use static linking, and there's little point dynamic linking if you bundle your dependencies... most of the time they are synonymous.

Exceptions are things like plugins, but that's pretty rare.

No idea! I guess having a hobby project maybe? Difficult to have time & energy for that sometimes though, e.g. if you have kids or a long commute.

Maybe you could do pair programming with juniors in the guise of mentoring? I have no idea if that's a good idea; just brainstorming.

I don't know why you're being downvoted. It literally starts with the word OPINION in bold red caps.