bitcrafter

Don't worry, it's not too late to join in! Just look for the comments that have a lot of upvotes already, and add yours to the pile.

Nothing if that works for you, but sometimes I end up using Ctrl+Insert / Shift+Insert a lot because I am doing a lot of things in the terminal and Ctrl+C has a different meaning there, so it is nice for Ctrl+Insert / Shift+Insert to work everywhere for when I have it in my muscle memory.

Yeah, playing with it for fun to see what you can make it come up with is a perfectly reasonable use case, if it weren't for the environmental cost...

When I go on a bike ride, I don't constantly have people pulling beside me reminding that I could be driving in a car.

When I use cash, the person taking it does not remind me that I could have used a credit card.

When I open a container of oatmeal, there isn't a little piece of paper that springs out and reminds me I could be eating instantly ready breakfast cereal instead.

Being written in Rust has mixed effects. Rust is still less mainstream than C, so fewer people can contribute. However, it does attract more interest because it’s different.

Yes, it's "different". That is all that it has to offer: it's "different". There is no other reason why people might be interested in it.

However, the reasons why you create/contribute to new-but-similar projects is to add functionality that the original project doesn’t have.

Why is that the only reason to motivate someone to do such a thing?

So why are people (and Canonical) contributing so much labor to something that still doesn’t function as intended?

Maybe we should take them that they word that they are genuinely think that coreutils would be better if it were written in Rust? Why is that such a radical possibility?

I say it’s the licensing.

Yes, I have noticed that you are very big on saying what others' motivations are.

So the fact that it is written in Rust has absolutely nothing to do with it?

I don't know where you are getting "a decade" from, but assuming we are using the percentage of passing tests as our metric of the percentage of "what coreutils does"--which is dubious, but it's your metric so let's go with that for the moment--we see in the very same plot that just four years ago it only did 25 percent of "what coreutils does", so clearly significantly more has happened in the last four years than did in the previous six, rather the project being worked on equally hard for the entire time.

Also, you seem to imply that it shouldn't have taken them "a decade" to get accomplish "85 percent of what coreutils does", but that raises the question: exactly how long should it have taken exactly? Can you cite evidence that it took significantly less time for coreutils to get to the point where it accomplished "85 percent of what coreutils does" today? If not, then there is no basis of comparison we can use to decide whether a decade is a long time or not to have gotten to this point.

Yeah, and this policy is especially nonsensical when you consider that in most cases the programs were actually written in C.

In civilized languages tail recursion takes care of this for you. 😁

They would all lose because they stretch all the way down into Antarctica which means that the penguins would be involved...

Hi @cm0002! Out of curiosity, it has been stated by @lengau that you posted this here because Ubuntu's switch to uutils has motivated you to pay more attention to other projects that the FSF is working on. Is this true, or was this just a projection?

(Just to be clear, I don't mind if this is your motivation, since you supply so much of the content here so I am not going to complain, and it is fun to hear about projects I was unaware of anyway! I just don't like seeing people project their own biases onto others.)