My naive opinion is a commitment to not break the ABI is a good thing not just for everyone else but for C++ as well. Languages like C#, Swift and Python (maybe even Rust?) have tools to integrate with C++ fairly deeply and cleanly. If C++ commits to being stable enough then there won’t be a reason to rewrite some amount of C++ into something else. It’s not a surprise that big tech is trying to move away from C++ and that’s not necessarily bad and remaining stable means the transition isn’t rushed. In the meantime people who enjoy and excel at writing C++ still can. Just seems like an overall positive thing to commit to.
This isn't about language ABI, which is the realm of the various implementations which have their own stability guarantees.
ABI stability in the context of the standards committee is about library ABI, specifically the standard library. When the committee updated the wording about C++'s std::string in C++11, it meant implementers needed to change the layout of a std::string, making this "new" std::string incompatible with the "old" std::string. Any libraries passing std::string across API boundaries needed to be recompiled with the "new" std::string.
This has no effect on FFIs for interop with other languages, which are not passing STL types across language boundaries to begin with (a std::string has no meaning in Python).
ABI stability for the standard library is motivated by large, old, coroporate codebases which had poor API practices, passed STL types across ABI boundaries, and subsequently lost access to the source code of those libraries and applications or otherwise cannot recompile them for some reason. Many people question the wisdom of catering to such users.
> ABI stability for the standard library is motivated by large, old, coroporate codebases which had poor API practices, passed STL types across ABI boundaries, and subsequently lost access to the source code of those libraries and applications or otherwise cannot recompile them for some reason. Many people question the wisdom of catering to such users.
It's also motivated by Linux distributions and other complex systems where rebuilding and installing the world in one go is not possible/feasible.
In order for my new and improved Rectangle to talk to another really cool Rectangle, I have to resize one of my edges to fit nicely on the Square and the 2nd Rectangle must do the same. The Square is a stable interface that rarely changes.
I hate that the Square is a stable structure that doesn't change sizes dramatically when it's proven that a new size is better.
Where I work we use Confluent Cloud who has their own proprietary UI. I've always found it to be lacking, hard to use and not very good.
We substituted it with AKHQ https://akhq.io/ , which is miles ahead of anything I've seen. The main issue with it are the interesting UX decisions that requires learning. For example, a lot of links require a double click, which isn't a common behavior in Web Apps. Besides that, it's absolutely wonderful and goes beyond just Kafka. We use Kafka Connect very heavily and AKHQ seems to implement the full CRUD for Connect.
To be fair, Seattle's electric grid has been on all sustainable energy for a while now. Seattle is one of the greenest city in the U.S. On top of that, any person living in King County is able to pay a little bit extra to opt into 100% sustainable energy.
The reaction from Seattle isn't terribly illogical.
EDIT: Should mention the city is NOT carbon neutral by any means. We still have buses running on gas.
True, we are fortunate we can avoid hard choices on power source up here (lots of hydro). But what I meant to highlight was that our focus tends to be on solving our local short-term climate problems, just like everybody else.
My understanding, from whatever nature TV show when I was younger, is that the beetles don't actually die. They literally freeze in ice. I also remember reading that certain countries are releasing tens of thousands of birds (possibly hummingbirds?) to deal with them as well. I don't have links so possibly grain of salt here.
If you look at California as an example, you can see hundreds of acres of trees that are dying year over year. I remember going camping in lush green forests that are all gone now. I'm in the PNW now and from what I've seen and heard from others the summers are getting longer and hotter so it's only a matter of time before what's happening to California comes here.
EDIT: From what I remember as well, every tree comes with defenses to keep beetles away. This is why trees are sappy. In order to produce sap the trees need water, and they produce their own sugars through photosynthesis (sap being a mix of water and sugar). Trees in certain areas are adapted to the length of their winters. A longer winter means more time without dealing with beetles but might also mean less time spent in dry soil.
I just went on a long trip and going on a couple more in a few months. The Tesla navigation will autopilot you to the charging stations making it a something you don’t even need to think about. Most of the chargers are near food or shopping but we usually just take the time to stretch or get some fresh air. By the time your charge is low you definitely feel like you need a stretch anyways. We also went camping at an RV site and plugged the car in. We were able to run the heater while we slept in sleeping bags in the back. If we weren’t at an RV site we would have charged to 95% at a super charger and driven in and tent camped for 5 days and it would have been more than enough to get us back.
I kindly disagree with your critique. BUT I am also very biased. This is because I am an owner of a Model Y, but I do not own any stock in Tesla whatsoever. I do not like nor trust Elon Musk, especially with my retirement.
I think people want EV's and when they see that they only need to spend a little bit extra for that extra range and access to a nationwide supercharger network. They are willing to pay for it. I don't think a drop in stock is going to change that mentality. Other automakers keep trying to build a quality EV, but they simply do not hold up to a Tesla.
To add to this, Pulumi has a few features not yet present in CDK like encrypted state, and dynamic resources. The TLS/Random provider also seems to be missing from CDK but present in Pulumi. I am using all of these features in some Pulumi projects and couldn't imagine using CDK, ever.
tl;dr Use your preferred tooling, but don't assume a team couldn't justify using their tools of preference.
