It makes your development workflow smooth enough that you have the time and energy to do stuff like all the bullet points listed in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46437289

>you have the time and energy to do stuff like all the bullet points listed

Don't disagree but in specific case, per the author, project was made via Claude Code. Although could as well be that Zig is better as LLM target. Noticed many new vibe projects decide to use Zig as target.

Maybe you don't know this but Apple has a donation-matching program. If you make donations to non-profits through some special internal mechanism, the company will send a donation of equal value (up to some limit). If I recall correctly the limit is 30K USD per person.

Do you have any links or more info about the special internal mechanism? Would need an apple employee to initiate this I assume?

"When you give money to an eligible organization, we’ll match your donations one-for-one, so your $1 has the impact of $2. And if you choose to donate your time, we’ll contribute $25 for every hour you volunteer. Whether you donate time or money, Apple will match your contributions up to $10,000 a year."

https://www.apple.com/careers/us/life-at-apple/benefits.html

That is neat- any idea what they consider an eligible organization?

They're probably using something like https://benevity.com/ to do the vetting, esp. for non US charities.

Any non-profit, or just charitable non-profits (aka 501(c)(3))? Unfortunately, the US does not consider producing open source software to be charitable activity.

It can. There are a number of charitable foundations that support open aource. For example the Python Foundation.

But it is on a case by case basis, and it does take work to get the IRS to accept it.

Interesting. In any case, libsodium's fiscal sponsor (Open Source Collective - https://opencollective.com/opensource) is not a 501(c)(3) non-profit.

As the application author you can set the release mode in the build script so that the release flag looks like `zig build --release` instead, and the user doesn't choose the optimization mode.

As a user you can pass `--release` to `zig build` to request release mode. If the application doesn't want to pick for you, you'll get an error and then you can pick for yourself.

In this case, it looks like the author of Phoenix wants to choose ReleaseSafe as the official release mode of the application.

Phoenix is the name of my hometown, btw.

That's a great idea, but if they did, then YouTube could retaliate by specifically using features that MicroQuickJS does not support.

Of course... The arms race is eternal. :)

2026 will be Year of the Linux Desktop, at least for Mr. Diallo!

this would provide the optimizer the unfair chance to replace the entire application with a compile time constant

C doesn't make you dependent on constant Internet connectivity, charge a monthly subscription, or expose you to lawsuits from powerful companies claiming copyright over your work.

IDEs don't make you dependent on constant Internet connectivity, charge a monthly subscription, or expose you to lawsuits from powerful companies claiming copyright over your work.

Intellisense/autocomplete doesn't make you dependent on constant Internet connectivity, charge a monthly subscription, or expose you to lawsuits from powerful companies claiming copyright over your work.

> IDEs don't make you dependent on constant Internet connectivity, charge a monthly subscription,

Sometimes they do! But not in general, yes.

I get what you're saying but let's be real: 99.99999% of modern software development is done with constant internet connectivity and is effectively impossible without it. Whether that's pulling external packages or just looking up the name of an API in the standard library. Yeah, you could grep docs, or have a shelf full of "The C++ Programming Language Reference" books like we did in the 90s, but c'mon.

I have some friends in the defense industry who have to develop on machines without public internet access. You know what they all do? Have a second machine set up next to them which does have internet access.

99.99999% of modern software is crap that I don't want to be forced or even peer pressured into using

flagged for astroturfing

(1) DNS is hard

It's really not.

Just because some systems took something fundamentally simple and wrapped a bunch of unnecessary complexity around it does not make it hard.

At its core, it's an elegant, minimal protocol.

It falls into the category that most people think they understand DNS, the same as JavaScript, or e.g. elections, but the devil is in the detail. And I can tell you, at least for DNS (and Dutch Elections), it's kind of tricky, see fun cases like https://github.com/internetstandards/Internet.nl/issues/1370 and I thought the same before I had my current job which involves quite some tricky DNS stuff (and regarding this we also sometimes encounter bugs in unbound https://github.com/internetstandards/Internet.nl/issues/1803 )

But maybe DNSSEC is the 'unnecessary complexity' for you (I think it's kind of fundamental to secure DNS). Also without DNSSEC they needed RFC's like https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8020 to clarify fundamentals (same goes for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8482 to fix stuff).

Dutch elections? How do they come into this?

There is this list of things tech people think they understand (DNS, javascript), and more common you can see this with everyday people, e.g. with stuff like elections: the basic concept is clear, understandable, but the devil/complexity is in the detail, how to handle certain exceptions. I was employed by the Election Management Body of The Netherlands for a few years, so I can only vouch for the complexity of that relatively simple election system, but I'm pretty sure it will hold for about every country ;)

You and GP are talking about completely different things. Yes DNS at its core it’s an elegant minimal protocol. But all the complexity comes from client side configuration before the protocol is even involved.

We have complexity like different kinds of VPNs, from network-level VPNs to app-based VPNs to MDM-managed VPNs possibly coexisting. We have on-demand VPNs that only start when a particular domain is being visited: yes VPN starting because of DNS. We have user-provided or admin-provided hardcoded responses in /etc/hosts. We have user-specified resolver overrides (for example the user wants to use 8.8.8.8 not ISP resolver). We have multiple sources of network-provided resolvers from RDNSS to DHCPv6 O mode.

It is non-trivial to determine which resolver to even start sending datagrams with that elegant minimal protocol.

Lots of elegant, minimal things are hard to use effectively.

There are steps that three different parties can take, which do not depend on other parties to cooperate:

POSIX can specify a new version of DNS resolution.

libcs can add extensions, allowing applications to detect when they are targeting those systems and use them.

Applications on Linux and Windows can bypass libc.

What about macOS?

they already have CFHostStartInfoResolution / CFHostCancelInfoResolution