1. 33

  2. 39

    This is a misleading headline. Twitter has announced they are implementing a separate, explicitly experimental compiler from scratch. I don’t think it’s fair to characterize this as a fork.

    1. 7

      Even more: this compiler will not support all of Scala features (they don’t know yet which features will be dropped from support).

      1. 1

        Which is basically forking it, since it’s going to have it’s own set of features that are a subset of Scala.

    2. 4

      Suggest: compilers

      1. 1

        kinda interesting that there are now so many scala forks out there. Lots of interesting stuff happening.

        I hope it’s not too hard to share across the forks though (for example I bet the type checker could be pulled out into its own thing)

        1. 3

          Since this isn’t a fork, it will be probably next to impossible. Typelevel Scala is much closer to Lightbend Scala for such exchange to be feasible.

          1. 1

            Although given this is based on Kentucky Mule, which uses the parser from dotty, there may be some overlap between this and the next Lightbend Scala. We can hope.

            EDIT: Or maybe not: “Similarly to dotty, we are starting from a clean slate” - relatedwork.md

        2. [Comment removed by author]

          1. 12

            The scale of the problem they solve is a lot larger than what most people will ever work on. The fan-out nature of the product is challenging enough, but there’s more.

            The 140 chars thing is inconsequential. It would be the easiest thing to change.

            1. 0

              The 140 chars thing is inconsequential. It would be the easiest thing to change.

              Agree with everything until this part. I think it’s very likely that there is some critical RDBMS with a varchar(140) column that’ll make “easy” an actual nightmare with people waking up in cold sweats.

              1. 6

                140 characters are counted as 140 Unicode grapheme clusters, so the byte size is already potentially a lot larger and variable.

                1. 1

                  True. In MySQL you’d likely set the collation to utf-8 or whatever. That doesn’t make doubling, or eliminating the character limit all together any less difficult though?

                  1. 3

                    In MySQL you’d likely set the collation to utf-8 or whatever.

                    Fun fact: you’d want the “whatever” https://medium.com/@adamhooper/in-mysql-never-use-utf8-use-utf8mb4-11761243e434

                    But here’s the rub: MySQL’s “utf8” isn’t UTF-8.

                    The “utf8” encoding only supports three bytes per character. The real UTF-8 encoding — which everybody uses, including you — needs up to four bytes per character.

                    MySQL developers never fixed this bug. They released a workaround in 2010: a new character set called “utf8mb4”.

                    1. 2

                      It’s things like this that inspire me to hold PostgreSQL tighter to my bosom.

                2. 2

                  A few years ago they had a bug for a day or so which allowed much longer tweets, so I doubt they have this hard limit anywhere except for the validation code.

              2. 4

                Twitter is all about pushing ads and trying to find ways to monetize their users. They have over 3k employees, and I have no idea WTF they’re doing to be honest. The site has terrible performance, and it’s buggy as hell. If you look at the source for the page, it’s downright nightmarish. They keep adding shit like moments that nobody wants or ever asked for, while ignoring actual user requests like the ability to edit tweets.

                I started using Mastodon recently, and it’s just a better experience all around. The core functionality of Twitter is not that hard to implement,. If you’re not trying to monetize, then you can provide a much better experience for the users.

                Personally, I’d really like to see the internet go back to being a distributed system where anybody can run a server and interact with people, as opposed to current centralized model where a few sites dominate all the social media.

                Running your own servers is cheaper and easier than ever. You can get a Digital Ocean droplet for 5 bucks a months nowadays, and the prices are only going down.

                Meanwhile, setting up and managing apps like Mastodon has become much easier as well thanks to Docker. Run the container that the maintainer packages, and you can get it up and running in minutes.

                I think Mastodon is a great example that this model absolutely does work today. I also think that it’s more robust than the startup model.

                Mastodon is open source, and it will be around as long as people want to use it. The features get added based on user demand, as opposed to demand of investors. Anybody can run their own node, and set it up any way they like. No central entity decides how Mastodon is used, or what it’s used for.

                This is what internet was meant to be. We took a terrible detour with walled gardens like Facebook and Twitter, but it doesn’t have to be that way.

                1. 1

                  If you’re not trying to monetize, then you can provide a much better experience for the users.

                  There are tons of shitty FOSS projects out there. I am an open source enthusiast, my job title is literally “Open Source Software Engineer.” I love FOSS software. But the idea that it’s better because you’re not trying to make money is just not one I’d come close to making. I love using Linux on the desktop but it’s way worse for most users than Windows or MacOS. Open source is great because it’s about Freedom, not because it provides a superior user experience. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t. It really depends on the product and what you’re using it for.

                  1. 2

                    This. Often proprietary is better quality because more man hours are spent on it. However, despite this I will use Free Software over proprietary any day because it gives me something proprietary can never give me, Free Software gives me freedom.

                    1. 1

                      Of course, open source is not a guarantee that you’ll end up with a great piece of software. However, I’m talking about the specific difference in motivation for Twitter and Mastodon developers. Personally, I find Linux far preferable to Windows as a desktop as well, but MacOS is definitely a lot more polished than Linux.

                  2. 3

                    they make a considerable amount of money. is it net profit? no. mostly because they have an insane head count.