"Garbage collection" is ambiguous, actually; reference counting is traditionally considered a kind of "garbage collection". The type you're thinking of is called "tracing garbage collection," but the term "garbage collection" is often used to specifically mean "tracing garbage collection."
BatmanAoD
joined 2 years ago
What's wrong with the explanation given?
...the rest of it explains the context, and then briefly says that some people will disagree with the decision, but those people should just use a different distro. What are you complaining about?
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).
You could also just alias find back to ^find. I don't use nushell as my daily driver for other reasons, and I agree with the comment above that it's a bit questionable for them to have a built-in with that name, but I don't understand why you'd even try out a new shell, let alone one that's radically different from POSIX-style shells, much less complain online about the shell you just tried, when you're already happy with the shell you're using and are not willing to adapt any habits or explore the configuration options to match your needs.
I genuinely can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
I really don't think these are clearly comparable. I would rather see two more similar projects with comparable functionality that are both attempting to optimize for program binary size.
Busybox ls has 26 flags. GNU ls has 60.
From the busybox "about" page:
The utilities in BusyBox generally have fewer options than their full-featured GNU cousins; however, the options that are included provide the expected functionality and behave very much like their GNU counterparts.... BusyBox has been written with size-optimization and limited resources in mind.
Neither of these is true for uutils, which is specifically targeting perfect GNU compatibility. I don't think there is a comparable Rust project for minimized utilities.
Sure, Old English. But the commenter isn't writing in old or even middle English.
That's fair; Python, Swift, and most Lisps all use or have previously used reference-counting. But the quoted sentence isn't wrong, since it said no "garbage collection pauses" rather than "garbage collection."