To be fair, the drop/dealloc "pause" is very different from what people usually mean when they say "garbage collection pause", i.e. stop-the-world (...or at least a slice of the world).

Nah, this is society if we move past needing so many passwords. Passkeys, federated logins, and one-time login codes are all preferable.

It's not in C, if that's what you mean.

TypeScript is a language, and traditionally languages are considered separate from their implementations. When I first saw the headline I hoped maybe it meant a non-JS runtime for compiled TS, and I'm well aware of the difference. Yes, that would be a much larger undertaking than porting the compiler to a new language, but the headline doesn't indicate how large a project this is, and Microsoft certainly has the resources to write a new backend (even a native-code one) for the TS compiler.

Yes, the dialog was changed, as part of this linked issue (and maybe again after that; this whole incident is very old). After reading some of the comments on that issue, I agree with the reasoning with some of the commenters that it would be less surprising for that menu option to behave like git reset --hard and not delete tracked files.

From your comment, I'm not convinced you do get it. You wrote a lot of words completely beside the point of the joke, which is a series of analogies, not a statement about the natural languages involved in the creation of programming languages.

By Ada getting it right, I assume you mean throwing an exception on any overflow? (Apparently this behavior was optional in older versions of GNAT.) Why is Ada's preferable to Rust's?

In Rust, integer overflow panics by default in debug mode but wraps silently in release mode; but, optionally, you can specify wrapping, checked (panicking), or unchecked behavior for a specific operation, so that optimization level doesn't affect the behavior. This makes sense to me; the unoptimized version is the same as Ada, and the optimized version is not UB, but you can control the behavior explicitly when necessary.

git checkout ma<tab>

If you don't have autocomplete set up for your shell, get it working. If someone has a different branch named ma..., ask if you can delete it, and get your team to adopt a decent branch naming convention.

And even if releases are hosted on github, there should ideally be a download links page somewhere that presents the different binaries or installation files in an easier to understand format, especially if the software is designed for non-developers.

ed, the "standard editor" (according to its man page) and the predecessor of vi (the "visual editor"), is a terminal editor that doesn't automatically display any of the text you're working on; you have to use the p ("print") command to display the lines your wish to see.

I really like that it follows this up with, effectively, "we're done here, get out"

If the executable were easily reproducible from the source code, then yes, downloading a precompiled binary would be akin to executing code in build.rs or a proc macro. The fact that it's not makes these very different, because it makes your suggestion of "vet[ting] their packages themselves" impossible.