Government maybe rather than legislating big companies stores could not back up smaller open HW/SW vendors? It seems we gave up increasing competition on HW and what is left is app store level...
It replaces the "list of short shell-scripts" aspect of Make, but it doesn't replace the "only execute rules that need to be re-executed" part, which is the actually useful bit.
This is the most frustrating bit of this weird recursive ecosystem of build tools. No one really uses all of make, so they only clone the bits they need, so their tool is simple and clean and beautiful to a subset of the community that has their same problem. But it can't replace make, so seven months later someone with a slightly different problem shows up with a make replacement, and the circle of life continues.
And you see this on the other side of the problem area too, where large and ugly tools like cmake are trying to do what older large and ugly software like autotools did, and trying to replace make. And they suck too.
I continue to believe the GNU make in the late 80's was and remains a better generic tool than everything in the modern world in all ways but syntax (and in many cases, again c.f. cmake, it had better syntax too). Had the original v7 syntax used something other than tabs, and understood that variable names longer than 1 byte were a good thing, we might never have found ourselves in this mess.
they do place themselves as an alternative to make, but imho they're entirely different and not at all comparable. make is centered around creating artefacts and not rebuilding what is already built. just is a command runner.
The main benefit I see with using Make as a command runner is that it's a standard tool that's installed "everywhere". Even though these replacements seem nicer to use, I never felt like they bring enough to the table to warrant having to install an extra tool.
I also use just as a command runner, but I gotta agree with the others here that it should be described accurately as a command runner, while make is a build system.
There are some uses of make, especially by people who have never used it to build C/C++ projects, which makes more sense to replace with just. It doesn't have the baggage that make does, and they're not using it to actually make files. They also quite likely don't know the conventions (e.g. what a lot of us expect "make install" to do), and I support them in not learning the conventions of make—as long as they use something else. :)
Other uses of make will need other modern replacements, e.g. Cmake or Bazel.
It is possible that Kids These Days can say "no thanks" when someone tries to teach them make, and that the future of make is more along the lines of something us greybeards complain about. Back in _my_ day, etc.
it usually isn't because banks are not all-seeing and cannot tell which local employer or industry is likelier to go bust. in that sense all metro areas are often equally risky.
We can have a problem with forms being on paper and not doing "add this" or "subtract that" automatically? It was available in other countries 10+ years AGO ;)
Global albedo modification happens today its just not very directed (eg. pitch black tarmac next to concrete sidewalk there is significant difference in temperature on sunny days, AC bills would be probably bit cheaper we didn't have tarmac).
Yeah I'm sure it'll be great and we will think about every single potential side effects, just like with asbestos, DDT, lead in gas, freon in fridges, &c.
We're most likely utterly fucked whatever we do unless we go back to live like pre industrial revolution humans
If we extrapolate then lets also do it for the impact of the disaster. Gen 3 disaster: nobody dies and nothing leaks outside the reactor containment vessel.
Your implication is that a reactor containment vessel in a Gen 3 nuclear reaction is capable of containing radioactive material no matter what physically happens to it (flooding, earthquake, asteroid impact, etc.) Is that accurate?
So at this point, we are concerned if the remains of people who would be killed by the asteroid, would also be slightly radioactive? An the 'remains' are being probably like finely pulverised ashes?
Like the containment building is basically a bunker, and the reactor vessel is like a thousand tons of steel. If any asteroid gets through that, the neighbourhood is already gone.
So many people pointed out Fukushima to me, and most of them did not know that the tsunami killed 10,000 people and radiation killed zero.
Fukushima was cleaned up by a massive task force using globalized technology. What I'm wondering about is if nuclear power is scaled to have hundreds or thousands of plants across the world, and something happens to humanity's ability to mount a globalized cleanup effort (using diesel, electricity, etc.), are the remaining societies safe from the effects of the decaying plants?
It's a rather facetious commentary on the "now it is gen 3's turn for a disaster comment", by implying that if that progression holds, the so too should the scale of damage.
The gen 1 disaster left land uninhabitable, the gen 2 disaster just took some cleanup, therefore the gen 3 disaster will be a non-issue.
Asteroid impact? Is the reaction even going to be critical at that point? Assuming you mean something smaller like a meteoroid, I think most US plants would either be okay, or you have other problems to worry about (like if any people are within multiple miles of the plant in every direction).
There would be an intermediate size asteroid that would be able to penetrate the containment and damage the core. That same size asteroid wouldn't be much of a worry if it just hit a field next to a town. On the other hand, that same asteroid could topple over some skyscraper and kill a few thousand people, which is more than the aforementioned nuclear-asteroid accident would.
I was just listing things that could affect the structure of the core. The real question about nuclear disasters isn't whether or not humanity can respond to them given functioning society, it's what happens when a society collapses (extended power outage, etc.) and then something affects the fissile material. Fukushima took a lot of people to clean up.
