I think a better term would have been "non-breaking backwards compatible change". hard/soft forks are very much the jargon used when talking about ways to upgrade blockchain based protocols.
The word “method” already has a definition in Rust, which includes all intrinsic and trait methods. I feel like ‘dyn’ is relatively rarely useful and defining the term “method” based on what’s compatible with it is a bad idea.
“Ethics” for what is almost certainly an honest mistake with a reasonable diligence of research? Accusing someone of ethics violations should require more research than you’ve done!
Would you have found out about those earlier sources without Wikipedia? I think it really depends on how obscure they actually were. I’d take the fact that neither Wikipedia nor this article knew about these earlier sources in 2014 as evidence that they were pretty obscure.
Linux as a project is the kernel. Unlike most OSes, the most commonly used libc is maintained separately. As a result, Linux the operating system is the one where it’s the most common and supported to avoid the “standard” libc because the kernel itself has a stable interface.
Again, you are trying to pretend not to notice the common understanding and the use of the word, while pulling out some definition nobody cares about.
Yes, technically, Linux is a kernel project. But, most time the word is used to designate the whole operating system (which annoys people who like to be precise, but it's also clear as day how OP meant to use the word, and you swapping the meaning of the word OP used for something that's convenient to you to make a useless contrarian point is just an example of bad discussion).
Clickbait implies a specific intent to mislead for clicks, whereas I think there’s a completely good-faith disagreement here about the meaning of the word “memory leak.”
