I played it and enjoyed it. The first time round I didn't really know what I was doing in terms of game mechanics, just went by what I would do in that place, and my moderation speed fell to 0 so I lost.
Second time I managed to finish the game, with some compromises but not too awful.
Possibly yes. I'll check if the results are equivalent.
Apparently the problem is due to an incompatibility between the use of certain libraries (winapi and windows-sys) which use different versions of COM. At least so I deduce from the documentation I've read.
There's a workaaround:
On Cargo.toml, use.
[build-dependencies]
embed-manifest = "1.3.1"
And on the root of the project (not the src dir) create a build.rs file with the following content:
use embed_manifest::{embed_manifest, new_manifest};
fn main() {
if std::env::var_os("CARGO_CFG_WINDOWS").is_some() {
embed_manifest(new_manifest("Contoso.Sample")).expect("unable to embed manifest file");
}
println!("cargo:rerun-if-changed=build.rs");
}
This embeds a manifest together with the executable, solving the issue.
Same erro by using this approach.
Tokio works fine, by itself. windows-native-gui works fine, by itself. It is the combination that causes this issue.
The way I look at this is I have a reasonable understanding of rust. I'm not an expert but I can more or less do whatever computation I need to do, use crates, and so on. But with async it's like learning another language. Somewhat of an exaggeration, but it's not just what code you need to write, but also being able to read the error messages from the compiler, understanding the patterns and so on. So yes, it's probably fine, but it does take work.
There is literally no instance in which expanding the scope of copyright law is a good thing. Never.
So probably the tokio mpsc channel, right? Why is it not possible tu use normal sync channels? I've read about it but I don't understand the reason.
Also I'm thinking of spawning a thread to do this part, or should it run on the tokio main function?
I've had just this case. Wanted to use a particular crate that uses async and it's forcing me to do lots of async things I'm unfamiliar with. I resent it a little, especially for a program that I'm fairly sure will not require concurrency of this sort.
At the same time, maybe I'll get used to async rust if I use it enough. But so far I'm not having a lot of fun with it.
As far as I can tell, this is incorrect. If there's a post on instance A, a reply from instance B, and someone on instance C follows the OP on A but not the RP on B, they will only see the OP without the reply.
Source: I very often notice this because I run a single-user instance, and when I open a thread it's incomplete, lacking posts from instances that I have not suspended.
Not that I expect a lot of consistency from imperialists, but essentially the same lines of argument can be used regarding the Russian Federation.
An advisory opinion would effectively settle Israel’s “bilateral dispute” without the state’s consent.
Ditto for .ru and .ua.
The court is not equipped to examine a “broad range of complex factual issues concerning the entire history of the parties’ dispute”.
Same thing, especially if we get back to the formation of the Soviet Union, independence referenda, and so on.
An advisory opinion would conflict with existing agreements between the parties and negotiation frameworks endorsed by the UN.
This would be Minsk I and II.
The request is not appropriate as it asks the court to “assume unlawful conduct on the part of Israel”.
Ditto.
The biggest issues for me are:
No single source of truth leads to the weird effect that if you check a post on your instance, it will have different replies from those on a different instance. Only the original instance where it got posted will have a complete reply set--and only if there are no suspensions involved. Some of this is fixable in principle, but there are technical obstacles.
Account migration is possible, but migration of posts and follows is non-trivial, Also migration between different implementations is usually not possible. Would be nice if people could keep a distinction between their instance, and their identity, so that the identity could refer to their own domain, for example.
Last, the issue with implementation compatibility. Ideally it should be possible to use the same account to access different services, and to some extent it works (mastodon can post replies to lemmy or upvote, but not downvote, for example).
Not that hard left (I gave money to Sumar but I'm realistic that it's the best we can get, more than what we want).
I know some people who are really pissed off about the amnesty, and personally I don't get it. Like in what world is the personal fate of a few hundreds of people who, let's say for the sake of the argument, ran an illegal referendum, more important than labour rights for everyone?