Wouldn’t this just prevent you from allocating more memory (than zero)?

Wrote a basic primality checker library, it’s not by far my most interesting or complex project but I like that I accomplished all my initial goals in a timely fashion.

This requires many assumptions that you or any computational system have no formal reason to make. Having an interpreter that just guesstimates exactly how you want the program structured, is going to run into problems when you, say want to extend the program.

But we are talking about a professional community, most people in this community that the post is about aren’t friends and likely don’t interact with each other outside of the work they do.

“Ostracizing” the accuser is generally voluntary. There is a difference between “I’m not comfortable working with this person” and leaving, and everyone coming to you and saying “Get out”.

The latter is fairly rare to happen to accusers, but it’s expected for the accused.

If we have insufficient information, how do we know that innocent people are actually being harmed, or if we do take action (the minimum action you seem to be advocating for is ostracism) against the accused how do we know that they are not the innocent ones?

Are we really supposed to resort to broad statistics when making intimate decisions?

Pretty sure they are arguing that any discussion about “non-majority-conforming” persons is moderated or censored by the existing majority to the disadvantage of the minority.

rustc,gfortran,GNAT,make,nano, and gedit. That’s basically every software I’ve used for programming in recent memory.