With the continuous degradation of Windows past 8.1, I slowly moved away from Surface, Windows and Touch, but even months after I have got a non-touch notebook, I still would touch my screen.
This is comparing what Rust has and other languages don't without also doing the opposite. For example, Java doesn't enforce data-race freedom, but its data races are safe, which means you can write algorithms with benign races safely (which are very useful in concurrent programming [1]), while in Rust that requires unsafe. Rust's protection against memory leaks that can cause a panic is also weaker, as is Rust's ability to recover from panics in general. Java is now in the process of eliminating the unsafe escape hatch altogether except for FFI. Rust is nowhere near that. I.e. sometimes safe Rust has guarantees that mean that programs need to rely on unsafe code more so than in other languages, which allows saying that safe Rust is "safer" while it also means that fewer programs are actually written purely in safe Rust. The real challenge is increasing safety without also increasing the number of programs that need to circumvent it or increasing the complexity of the language further.
[1]: A benging race is when multiple tasks/threads can concurrently write to the same address, but you know they will all write the same value.
Curious how they managed that, if its 'clean room' its fine, if they're looking at the source for Signal, that could be bad. Funnily enough, my client is in Rust.
Parameterize! That's a new word I didn't know. It adequately describes how I typeset my books, and I must not be alone. The ability to tell LaTeX to drop a picture around here, to the best of its ability, with the possibility of moving it down a paragraph or two if it doesn't fit is vital for me.
I think that's a missing feature of Typst yes, to have figures be either "here" or "top next page" automatically, with that priority. It can't do that.
The confusing part was that this has nothing to do with the images of this coffee stain package, because they are foreground/background and can be placed freely on the page (any corner or any custom offset from any corner; i.e from top left corner you can use page coordinates).
The coffee stains overlay/underlay text, so no layout problems at all.
But the dx/dy arguments also take percentages besides absolut lengths. I still don't get what the the other poster means by that fundamental limitation. I think they're confused about absolute positioning of background images vs floating figures. But typst has the analog setting of `[htbp]`, so the same "fire and forget" workflow is possible.
That's not exactly encouraging... My biggest gripe with typst is the various design choices which make writing maths much harder than LaTeX (and given many of the issues with LaTeX usability come from having to use poorly maintained legacy packages, not having basic functionality in the core of the replacement seems naive at best).
reply