

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>0:00</time>
      <p>
          Too   simple   for   simply   firmly   ways.   Even   like   just   learning   programming   language.   Word   is   my   first   programming   language.   I   think   the   tutorials   well   laid   out   for   the   newcomers.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>0:28</time>
      <p>
          Welcome   to   ADSP   the   Podcast,   episode   159,   recorded   on   November   13th,   2023.   My   name   is   Connor,   and   today   with   my   co-host   Brights,   we   conclude   our   conversation   with   Richard   Feldman   about   the   ROC   programming   language.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>0:42</time>
      <p>
          Interesting.   I   don&#39;t   actually   know   if   that   downside   does   apply   in   rock.   So   let   me   describe   the   other   thing   which   is   the   big   idea   of   ROC,   and   we&#39;ll   see   if   it   does   or   does   not.   Well,   so   first   of   all,   I   actually   am   not   sure   to   what   extent   people   would   want   to   use   rock   for   GPUs.   Anyway,   but   setting   that   aside,   um   so   the   big   idea   of   the   language   is   what   we   call   platforms   and   applications.   And   the   basic   idea   is   that   every   rock   program   has   exactly   one   platform   and   exactly   one   application.   So   if   I&#39;m   going   to   build   an   application,   like   what   we   traditionally   think   of   as   a   program,   um   could   be   a   library   also,   I   suppose.   Uh   but   basically   I&#39;m   going   to   pick   a   platform   to   build   that   application   on.   So   let&#39;s   say,   for   example,   I&#39;m   building   a   command   line   application.   I   would   probably   choose   a   platform   like   we   have   one   called   Basic   CLI,   which   is   just   a   platform   for   building   command   line   applications.   Or   let&#39;s   say   I   want   to   build   a   web   server,   that&#39;s   my   application.   I   would   pick   a   platform   that&#39;s   designed   for   building   web   servers,   um,   like   we   have   one   called   Basic   Web   Server.   Let&#39;s   say   that   I   want   to   build   a   native   GUI   desktop   application.   Again,   pick   a   platform   that&#39;s   sort   of   good   at   that.   So,   in   some   sense,   a   platform   from   an   application   author&#39;s   perspective   feels   like   picking   kind   of   like   a   framework.   It&#39;s   like   just   a   starting   point.   It&#39;s   like   this   is   something   domain-specific.   It&#39;s   like   this   is   gonna   give   me   the   tools   that   I   need   to   build   whatever   thing   I&#39;m   gonna   build.   Um   what&#39;s   different   between   rock   platforms   and   your   traditional   framework   is   what   is   in   scope   for   them.   So   traditionally,   in   most   languages,   C   included,   in   your   standard   library,   you   have   a   bunch   of   I/O   operations   as   well   as   data   structures   and   math   and   stuff   like   that.   And   then   if   you&#39;re   using   a   framework   for   something,   it&#39;s   kind   of   like   as   a   nice   to   have   on   top   of   standard   library   stuff.   It   gives   you   sort   of   like   more   that&#39;s   like   maybe   domain   specific.   Uh   and   also   your   memory   management   stuff   and   like   C   is   all   gonna   be   kind   of   separate.   You   can   do   that   however   you   want.   Now,   in   ROC,   what&#39;s   in   scope   for   a   platform   is   yeah,   it&#39;s   all   the   domain-specific   stuff.   So   like   a   web   server   is   gonna   have   a   way   to   do   like   HTTP,   it&#39;s   gonna   have   a   way   to   do,   you   know,   handle   uh   requests   and   turn   them   into   responses.   But   also   the   platform   is   responsible   for   providing   all   of   your   I.O.   primitives.   So   the   ROC   standard   library   doesn&#39;t   have   any   I.O.   in   it   at   all,   it   doesn&#39;t   even   know   how   to   do   it.   It&#39;s   just   like   it&#39;s   just   100%   data   structures.   Um   so   all   that   comes   from   your   platform.   Separately,   the   platform   is   also   responsible   for   memory   management.   So   uh   if   I   were   to   write   a   platform   like   for   I&#39;ll   give   the   use   of   the   example   of   web   server,   um   the   basic   web   server   platform,   so   rock   does   automatic   reference   counting,   that&#39;s   kind   of   the   default   memory   management   um   system.   But   the   platform   is   actually   comprised   of   two   pieces.   One   is   the   sort   of   public-facing   ROC   API,   but   the   other   part   is   something   implemented   in   a   lower   level   language   than   ROC   that   sits   beneath   that,   that   is   responsible   for   actually   implementing   the   like   I.O.   primitives   and   basically   all   of   the   like   low-level   stuff   that   you   would   normally   associate   with   like   a   language   runtime.   Um,   including   memory   management.   So   the   way   that   that   works   is   essentially   if   I&#39;m   writing   my   rock   application,   every   time   that   application   needs   to   allocate   some   memory,   the   rock   compiler   is   going   to   generate   a   call   to   a   function   that&#39;s   implemented   in   the   platform   somewhere   called   rock   underscore   alloc.   It&#39;s   basically   like   malloc.   Um   and   whenever   the   reference   count   gets   to   zero,   it&#39;s   gonna   call   rock   dalloc,   which   also   is   implemented   in   the   platform.   So   here&#39;s   an   example   of   what&#39;s   cool   about   this.   Let&#39;s   say   I&#39;m   building   the   like   on   the   basic   web   server   platform.   I   happen   to   know   that   basic   web   server   just   does   kind   of   your   traditional   malloc   and   free,   so   it&#39;s   basically   just   feels   like   a   normal   automatic   reference   counting   system.   Fine.   There&#39;s   a   work   in   progress   web   server   platform   that   is   planned   to   be   API   compatible   with   that   basic   web   server   one,   so   if   you&#39;ve   built   something   on   top   of   the   basic   web   server   platform,   you   could   just   try   switching   to   this   and   see   how   you   like   it.   But   its   main   selling   point   is   that   instead   of   using   Malik   and   free,   it   bump   allocates   on   a   per   request   basis.   So   if   you   have   a   request   handler,   a   request   comes   in,   that   entire   request   is   going   to   be   doing   bump   allocation   into   an   arena   that&#39;s   specific   to   that   request   for   the   entire   duration   of   the   request.   It&#39;s   not   gonna   free   anything,   and   then   once   you   get   to   the   end   of   the   request   and   you&#39;ve   sent   the   response   back,   it&#39;s   just   like   cool,   we&#39;ll   just   reset   the   arena   and   then   move   on.   And   you   also   set,   uh   you   say,   like,   here&#39;s   how   much   memory   I   want   to   allocate   to   each   request.   Each   request   gets   this   big   of   an   arena.   And   if   any   individual   request   exceeds   that,   then   you   get   a   500   error   and   nothing   else   happens   to   the   rest   of   the   in-flight   requests.   Um   so   this   has   like   a   number   of   cool   properties.   One   of   which   is   obviously   it&#39;s   we   assume   going   to   be   faster   than   like   managing   a   free   list   and   stuff   like   that.   Like   bump   allocation   and   deallocation   is   like   about   as   fast   as   it   gets   in   terms   of   memory   management   strategies   for   um   heap   allocations.   Um,   but   secondly,   it   also   means   that   you   get   this   really   nice   granular   control   over   um   memory   limits   on   a   per   request   basis,   rather   than,   for   example,   saying   like,   you   know,   this   entire   server   has   this   memory   limit,   and   if   we   go   over   that,   then   you   know,   maybe   like   something   bad   happens   to   the   other   requests   that   are   in   flight,   etc.   Um   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   sort   of   very   narrowly   scoped   and   sort   of   isolates   if   something   is   misbehaving   or   using   way   more   resources   than   we   anticipated,   it&#39;s   really   limited   to   just   that   one   request   handler   and   nobody   else&#39;s   experience   is   affected.   So   that&#39;s   something   that   I   don&#39;t   know   of   any   other   automatically   memory-managed   language   where   you   can   do   something   like   that.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>6:05</time>
      <p>
          When   when   um   uh   can   you   write   a   rock   application   where   like   do   you   write   code   that   is   platform   agnostic?   Um,   or   do   you   write   code   specifically   to   a   platform?
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>6:16</time>
      <p>
          Well,   if   I&#39;m   writing   an   application,   it&#39;s   yeah,   it&#39;s   gonna   be   for   that   particular   platform.   Um   but   I   guess   the   better   answer   is   you   can   do   both.   So   so   certainly   we   expect   like   libraries   in   the   in   the   ecosystem   to   be   almost   all   platform   agnostic.   We   have   a   plan,   and   this   is   something   that&#39;s   not   implemented   yet,   but   uh   a   design,   I   should   say,   for   how   to   make   it   so   that   you   can   write   platform   agnostic   I/O   packages,   like   things   that   depend   on   I.O.   but   don&#39;t   depend   on   any   particular   platform&#39;s   implementation   of   that   I.O.   They   just   say,   like,   I   depend   on   HTTP.   It,   you   know,   we   have   a   common   understanding   of   what   HTTP   IO   means   across   multiple   platforms.   And   as   long   as   you&#39;re   using   a   platform   that   provides   that,   cool,   you   can   use   this   package   for   you   know   error   reporting   or   something   like   that.   Um   uh   so   we   have   a   plan   for   all   that,   but   that&#39;s   not   uh   that   doesn&#39;t   exist   yet.   So   that&#39;s   still   in   the   uh   designed   but   not   implemented   stage.   So   the   the   cool   part   about   this   to   me   is   that   it   means   that   as   an   application   author,   I   get   a   user   experience   that&#39;s   quite   familiar.   I&#39;m   like,   oh   yeah,   okay,   I   I   choose   this,   it&#39;s   not   called   a   framework,   but   it&#39;s   you   know   something   similar   to   that,   that   like   it&#39;s   domain-specific,   and   I&#39;m   gonna   use   as   my   starting   point   to   build   on.   Maybe   it   feels   a   little   bit   weird   that   my   IO   primitives   don&#39;t   come   from   the   standard   library,   but   rather   they   you   know   come   from   there.   But   like,   whatever.   That&#39;s   not   very   different.   It&#39;s   just   like   a   where   am   I   importing   them   from?   Um,   but   then   you   just   sort   of   automatically   get   these   cool   benefits   in   terms   of   like   you   know,   memory   management,   and   another   really   interesting   one,   which   is   a   whole   long   tangent,   is   security.   Um,   so   one   of   the   things   you   can   do   with   this   is   somebody   can   implement   a   platform   called,   let&#39;s   call   it   like   SafeScript.   And   basically   the   idea   here   is   it&#39;s   like   this   is   a   command   line   application   where   the   feature   is   anytime   the   rock   program   that   you&#39;re   running   on   this   platform   tries   to   do   any   kind   of   I.O.   it   will   prompt   you,   like   say,   hey,   do   you   the   this   rock   program   wants   to   read   from   slash   etc   slash   password?   Do   you   want   to   allow   that?   Yes   or   no?   Um,   this   wants   to   write   to   this   folder   and   you   know   on   your   direct   on   your   hard   drive.   Do   you   want   to   allow   that?   This   wants   to   do   this   network   request   to   this   URL,   do   you   want   to   allow   that?   Um   and   the   purpose   of   this   would   be   I   don&#39;t   I&#39;m   I&#39;m   sure   you   guys   have   had   this   experience,   but   like   you   know,   you   download   some   program   from   the   internet   and   it&#39;s   like,   hey,   this   is   gonna   do   a   convenient   thing   for   you,   and   I&#39;m   like,   cool,   or   it&#39;s   gonna   destroy   my   you   know   computer   or   turn   it   into   a   bot,   or   like,   you   know,   install   something   that   I   don&#39;t   want   installed.   Um   there&#39;s   there&#39;s   really   no   nice   way   to   verify   that   like   something   that   you   download   from   the   internet   is   not   doing   something   malicious.   Like   kind   of   the   state   of   the   art   is   like   either   like   run   it   through   a   some   sort   of   third-party   checker   that   hopefully   will   tell   you   whether   it&#39;s   legit   or   not,   or   inspect   all   the   source   code   and   the   source   code   of   all   of   its   dependencies   yourself.   Um,   which   is   like   nobody   does.   Um,   so   the   cool   part   about   this   is   that   if   you   have   this,   a   platform   like   that,   you   can   verify   something   you   downloaded   from   the   internet   just   by   looking   at   like   the   one   line   of   like   what   platform   is   it   using.   And   if   I   know   that   that   platform   is   the   one   that   does   the   prompting,   then   I&#39;m   like,   cool,   I   don&#39;t   have   to   trust   this   thing   because   it&#39;s   gonna   be   like   I&#39;m   running   it   in   the   browser,   where   like   anytime   it   tries   to   do   anything   that   could   possibly   harm   my   system,   it&#39;s   gonna   prompt   me.   And   because   the   platforms   are   in   charge   of   100%   of   I.O.   and   there&#39;s   no   workaround   for   that,   there&#39;s   no   like   escape   hash   that   lets   you   get   around   that   in   the   language.   I   know   with   100%   certainty   that   it&#39;s   like,   yeah,   if   it   tries   to   do   anything   malicious,   like   I&#39;m   gonna   get   a   prompt   and   I&#39;m   gonna   find   out   about   it,   I&#39;m   gonna   have   to   approve   that   before   it   can   do   the   thing.   Um,   that&#39;s   also   something   which   I   I   don&#39;t   know.   I   think   the   closest   I   have   heard   of   any   language   doing   something   like   that   is   Dino.   And   uh,   you   know,   again,   without   going   on   a   big   tangent,   like   they   don&#39;t   really   do   it   in   that   granular,   granular   of   a   way.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>9:51</time>
      <p>
          Interesting.   Yeah,   it&#39;s   interesting.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>9:54</time>
      <p>
          I&#39;ve   heard   this   on   uh   your   podcast   because   you&#39;ve   talked   about   people   that   are   more   familiar   with   security.   And   I   mean,   it   sounds   like   it&#39;s   just   offering   like   rock   is   gonna   be   offering   more   than   like   any   other   language   in   this   space   in   terms   of   Wait,   was   that   was   that   your   motivation   for   the   platforms   concept?
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>10:11</time>
      <p>
          Like   what   why   what   what   what   was   your   original   motivation   to   the   platform   concept?
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>10:16</time>
      <p>
          That&#39;s   a   great   question.   So   it   actually   wasn&#39;t   security   at   all.   I   just   kind   of   realized   that   part   way   through.   The   original   motivation   was   actually   just   that   um,   so   I&#39;m   a   big   fan   of   the   Elm   programming   language.   Uh   that&#39;s   before   I   got   into   ROC,   I   I   spent   quite   a   few   years   uh   doing   Elm   and   really   loving   it.   Um   I   wrote   a   book   about   it   called   Elm   in   Action   from   Manning.   Um   I   taught   like   courses   on   it.   I   spent   more   than   a   hundred   hours   personally   standing   in   front   of   classrooms   teaching   beginners   Elm.   Um   and   uh   the   reason   that   that   like   I   was   I   felt   motivated   to   start   ROC   was   basically   wanting   a   language   that   had   an   Elm-like   feel   to   it,   but   which   could   be   used   in   sort   of   the   long   tail   of   domains.   Like   Elm   is   a   very   domain-specific   language,   it&#39;s   like   really   focused   on   like   building   browser-based   UIs,   and   if   and   when   it   expands   to   other   domains,   Evan&#39;s   approach   is   to   like   look   at   that   domain   and   try   to   answer   the   question   like,   how   can   we   do   a   really,   really   great   job,   like   you   know,   supporting   this   domain   in   this   language?   And   that   could   potentially   mean   making   language   changes   to   do   that.   And   um   so   there&#39;s   naturally   this   sort   of   long   tail   of   use   cases   that   Elm   is   never   going   to   address,   like   Elm   itself.   Um,   examples   that   come   to   mind   are   things   like   editor   extensions.   Like,   I   was   using   Vim   for   a   long   time,   and   I   was   always   like,   I   would   like   to   write   my   own   extension,   but   I   don&#39;t   want   to   do   Vim   script.   Like   VimScript   does   not   have   a   good   reputation   in   terms   of   like   user-friendliness.   I   would   really   love   to   use   Elm   or   an   Elm-like   language   for   that,   or   like   database   extensions,   or   you   know,   robotics   making   a   clock.   Like,   there&#39;s   just   all   these   things   where   it&#39;s   like   Elm&#39;s   never   gonna   get   into   that   domain.   And   so   I   wanted   a   language   that   could   try   to   recreate   the   Elm-like   experience,   but   for   all   these   domains.   One   of   the   things   that   I   think   is   key   to   the   the   niceness   of   Elm   is   that   for   a   given   domain,   Elm   is   like,   look,   here&#39;s   all   the   primitives   that   make   sense   in   this   domain.   Like   you   don&#39;t   have   um,   like   in   the   browser,   for   example,   you   don&#39;t   have   like   file   system   stuff.   Like   Elm   just   doesn&#39;t   have   any   file   APIs   because   you   don&#39;t   have   files   in   the   browser.   Um   in   contrast,   like   I   know   that   you   can   use   Rust   um   in   the   browser.   Like   there&#39;s   uh   there&#39;s   a   package   called   UYEW   that   is   for   like   building   user   interfaces   on   WebAssembly   and   Rust   in   the   browser.   But   of   course,   like   in   the   Rust   standard   library,   there&#39;s   a   whole   module   on   file   system   stuff.   Like   if   I&#39;m   depending   on   a   third-party   library   that   does   a   bunch   of   file   system   stuff,   I   don&#39;t   even   know   what&#39;s   gonna   happen   if   I   use   that   in   the   browser.   I   also   don&#39;t   even   know   which   of   my   dependencies   like   are   gonna   do   that   or   are   gonna   rely   on   that   functionality   being   there   if   I   try   to   use   them   as   dependencies   in   my   browser-based   project.   Um,   so   the   whole   ecosystem   in   uh   in   in   most   languages   is   sort   of   let&#39;s   assume   that   like   everything   is   available   even   though   it   might   not   be.   I   have   similar   questions   about   like   database   extensions.   Like   if   I&#39;m   writing   a   database   extension,   I   don&#39;t   want   that   thing   to   be   doing   arbitrary   network   requests   or   like   HTTP   in   the   middle   of   my   database.   That&#39;s   that&#39;s   like   not   good   for   such   a   performance-sensitive   environment.   Um   so   uh,   or   and   likewise,   you   know,   if   I&#39;m   uh   running   like   a   little   you   know   servo   thing   on   a   Raspberry   Pi,   maybe   it&#39;s   not   connected   to   the   internet.   Like,   what   if   I&#39;m   using   a   dependency   that&#39;s   you   know   relies   on   doing   a   network   connection?   Um   so   basically,   I   really   wanted   to   try   to   recreate   that   sort   of   domain-specific   focus   while   still   addressing   the   long   tail   of   domains.   And   this   was   the   solution   I   came   up   with   was   just   to   say   each   individual   domain,   you   somebody   can   create   their   own   little   elm-like   experience   in   that   domain   using   a   platform.   They   can   say,   here   are   the   primitives   that   are   available   that   I   think   make   sense   in   this   domain,   in   this   use   case,   um,   and   you   know,   here&#39;s   the   memory   management   strategy   that   I   think   makes   sense   for   this   use   case.   Um,   and   you   know,   that   they   can   sort   of   be   in   charge   of   that.   And   as   a   user,   I   don&#39;t   necessarily   need   to   think   about   like,   oh,   what   can&#39;t   I   use   here?   It&#39;s   just   like,   oh,   well,   just   I   picked   my   platform,   and   that&#39;s   all   the   stuff   I   can   use   is   there,   and   all   the   stuff   that   um   you   know   doesn&#39;t   make   sense   in   this   domain   just   isn&#39;t   available,   and   so   there&#39;s   not   really   anything   to   think   about.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>14:12</time>
      <p>
          So,   but   like   what   so   you   can   only   use   one   platform   at   a   time.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>14:17</time>
      <p>
          Yes,   everybody   asked   that.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>14:20</time>
      <p>
          Okay,   but   what   if   I   want   to   use   two   platforms?
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>14:23</time>
      <p>
          So   I   mean   the   short   answer   is   that   um   it&#39;s   actually   fascinating   to   me   that   um   this   is   like   a   ubiquitous   like   question.   Whenever   I   describe   this,   everybody&#39;s   like,   and   uh   so   actually   a   common   way   that   people   phrase   it   is   like   can   I   compose   platforms?   So   let   me   describe   how   platforms   actually   work   under   the   hood,   and   then   I   think   you   can   maybe   see   why   the   question   doesn&#39;t   as   uh   doesn&#39;t   have   like   a   reasonable   answer.   So   literally   what&#39;s   happening   is   that   rock   itself   actually   compiles   down   to   basically   the   equivalent   of   a   C   library,   like   just   an   object   file.   Um   it   just   exposes   a   bunch   of   functions.   That&#39;s   it.   Rock   is   not   in   charge   of   like   main   or   you   know,   start   in   in   the   like   in   the   binary.   Um   rock   is   just   like   here&#39;s   a   bunch   of   functions.   The   platform   is   actually   in   charge   of   main.   The   platform   is   like   I   have   you   know   my   C   program   or   my   Rust   or   or   whatever   you&#39;re   using   to   implement   the   low-level   stuff.   Um,   and   you   have   main,   and   then   at   some   point   you   call   the   rock   function.   And   the   rock   that   that   sort   of   kicks   everything   off   from   the   rock   perspective.   So   another   use   of   rock,   by   the   way,   because   of   this   is   like   you   can   embed   it   in   like   a   very   large   other   project.   So   you   could   use   it   as   like   a   Lua   alternative   and   like   a   game   engine   or   something   like   that   if   you   wanted   to.   Um   but   because   of   that,   it&#39;s   like,   well,   how   would   you   have   multiple   platforms?   That&#39;s   like   saying,   like,   how   would   you   have   multiple   mains   in   an   executable?   It&#39;s   like,   well,   you   you   can&#39;t.   There&#39;s   like   there&#39;s   only   one   starting   point,   that&#39;s   the   whole   point.   So   because   the   platform   is   in   charge   of   all   that   stuff,   um,   it   just   doesn&#39;t   really   make   sense   to   have   more   than   one,   you   know,   competing   executable   inside   your   one   executable.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>15:53</time>
      <p>
          That   makes   sense.   But   like,   what   if   I   so   like   if   like   you   mentioned   uh   a   command   line   platform   and   a   like   a   web   server   platform,   right?   Like   what   if   I   wanted   to   have   some   sort   of   command   line   tool   that   has   a   web   server   inside   of   it?   Would   I   need   a   separate   platform   for   that?
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>16:10</time>
      <p>
          That&#39;s   a   good   question.   I   mean,   so   uh   not   necessarily.   Um   it   just   kind   of   depends   on   how   you   want   to   have   things   set   up.   So   for   example,   in   our   command   line   tool,   we   do   have   like   you   know   TCP   socket   support.   So   just   using   that,   you   can   just   build   a   web   server   on   top   of   that   in   pure   rock   if   you   want   to.   There&#39;s   nothing   stopping   you   from   doing   that.   What   you   won&#39;t   get   is   you   won&#39;t   get   the   like   bump   allocated   per   request   experience   that   you   get   if   you   get   like   a   um   uh   yeah.   But   now   another   thing   to   note   is   that   depending   on   what   you&#39;re   using   it   for,   like,   so   actually   I   I   actually   have   run   into   that   at   work   before,   um,   that   that   exact   use   case,   and   it   was   specifically   for   doing   um   like   an   OAuth   authentication   flow,   where   you   needed   to   like   stand   up   a   web   server   locally,   and   then   the   uh   um   the   thing   you&#39;re   authenticating   with   would   go   hit   that.   Um   but   I   think   there&#39;s   actually   a   pretty   good   reason   that   you   wouldn&#39;t   just   want   to   always   just   use   this   you   know   command   line   tool   that   um   like   in   addition   to   missing   out   on   the   potential   um   you   know   bump   allocation   benefits   on   the   request   handlers,   um,   which   is   that   like   I   kind   of   don&#39;t   want   my   web   server,   typically   if   it&#39;s   if   it&#39;s   mainly   gonna   be   a   web   server,   to   have   the   option   to   like   read   from   standard   in   and   like   block   on   that.   That&#39;s   not   good.   Like   that&#39;s   not   that&#39;s   not   gonna   do   anything,   uh   not   gonna   do   anything   good.   Um   that&#39;s   something   that   totally   makes   sense   for   a   command   line   app,   but   like   for   a   web   server,   it&#39;s   like   if   you&#39;re   ever   reading   from   standard   in,   like   something   has   probably   gone   wrong.   Um,   because   there&#39;s   not   gonna   be   a   keyboard   you   know   attached   to   that   thing,   most   likely.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>17:36</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   Okay,   that   makes   sense   to   me.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>17:39</time>
      <p>
          I   think,   I   mean,   you   mentioned   this   before,   but   it&#39;s   worth   highlighting   again   that   you   did   say   that   there&#39;s   gonna   be   a   facility   for   writing   libraries.   I   don&#39;t   know   if   you   want   to   call   them   like   platform   generic   libraries,   but   if   you&#39;re   yeah,   if   if   you&#39;re   trying   to   write   something   generic   enough   that   it   should   be   able   to   work   across   a   certain   number   of   libraries,   there&#39;s   gonna   be   a   way   or   a   number   of   platforms.   There&#39;s   gonna   be   a   way   to   do   that   in   the   future.   You&#39;re   not   gonna   need   n   different   libraries   for   n   different   platforms,   um   which   is,   I   think,   the   important   part.   Because   a   lot   of   the   times   applications,   that&#39;s   less   when   you   care   about   like   genericity   uh   versus   when   you&#39;re   writing   a   library,   you   don&#39;t   want   to   have   to   rewrite   that   library   every   single   time   you   want   a   new   application   on   a   different   platform.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>18:20</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   totally.   And   and   like   we   have   a   really   uh   that   part   of   the   design   I&#39;m   super   excited   about.   It&#39;s   just   like   it&#39;s   not   it&#39;s   not   the   top   priority   to   implement   it   right   now   because   right   now   we&#39;re   more   in   the   like,   hey,   let&#39;s   make   sure   that   people   can   have   a   good   experience   like   writing   on   the   one   platform.   There   is   no   real   ecosystem   yet   to   like   to   make   you   know   platform   agnostic.   Um,   but   but   yeah,   like   I   I   am   very   excited   for   once   we   do   implement   that   feature   because   I   I   think   the   design   turned   out   really,   really   well.   We   could   go   into   that,   but   I   I   think   we&#39;re   already   uh   probably   over   on   time   again.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>18:51</time>
      <p>
          I   was   gonna   say,   I   mean,   we   talked   a   lot   about   platforms   and   the   you   know   the   uh   continuation   monad,   aka   uh   task   chaining   IO   stuff.   Is   there   any   like   in   the   last   you   know   couple   minutes   though,   if   you   just   want   a   rapid   fire   you   know   ecosystem   or   language   stuff   for   people   to   be   excited   about   if   it   exists   or   will   exist,   is   there   gonna   be   a   package   manager?
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>19:13</time>
      <p>
          Yep,   that&#39;s   the   plan.   Um   so   you   already   can   do   packages   using   a   URL   thing.   This   is   something   I   I   think   uh   instead   of   rapid   firing,   I&#39;ll   just   mention   this   one   thing   because   I   think   it&#39;s   pretty   cool.   Um   so   the   way   that   you   do   packages   today,   we   don&#39;t   have   a   package   index   yet,   so   like   a   searchable   way   to   like   discover   them.   But   you   can   already   just   like   uh   automatically   download   packages,   and   we   have,   as   far   as   I   know,   this   is   we&#39;re   the   only   language   to   do   it   this   way.   And   I   think   this   design   is   awesome.   Um,   and   more   languages   should   steal   it.   Um   so   basically   the   way   that   works   is   let&#39;s   say   I   want   to   depend   on   Luke&#39;s   JSON   parsing   library.   The   way   that   I   do   that   is   in   my   dependencies,   I   say,   here   is   I   I&#39;m   depending   on   uh   this   this   JSON   parsing   library,   and   here   is   the   URL   for   it.   Now,   the   thing   that   we   do   that   nobody   else   does   is   that   when   I   specify   that   URL,   the   URL   has   to   be   in   a   particular   format,   which   is   that   the   end   of   the   URL   has   to   be   a   Blake   3   hash   of   the   contents   of   what&#39;s   gonna   be   downloaded   from   that   URL.   It   has   to   be   in   the   URL   itself.   Which   means   that   a   couple   things.   One   is   once   I   download   it,   first   of   all,   we   can   cache   it   forever   now,   if   we   want   to,   um,   because   we   know   that   it&#39;s   never   going   to   change.   If   it   does   change,   well,   it&#39;s   just   gonna   fail   the   the   checksum   when   we   download   it,   because   the   the   hash   is   is   different.   Um   this   also   means   that   if   that   domain   expires   or   gets   compromised   or   hijacked   or   whatever,   somebody   like   publishes   a   new   version,   even   if   I   have   never   downloaded   this   thing   before,   like   I&#39;m   just   reading   about   this   off   a   tutorial,   I   copy   paste   the   code   in,   I&#39;ve   never   used   Rock   in   my   life,   I   have   no,   there&#39;s   no   infrastructure   for   this,   there&#39;s   no   centralized   anything.   Like   I   just   use   that   URL,   somebody   took   it   over,   I   still   don&#39;t   get   a   bad   package.   The   worst   possible   thing   that   can   happen   is   I   get   an   error.   Um,   from   a   security   perspective,   this   is   I   think   unprecedented.   I   think   every   every   other   language   that   uses   URL-based   um   uh   like   packages   like   lets   you   download   a   package   direct   from   a   URL   as   a   dependency,   um,   either   they&#39;re   like   not   caching   it,   or   uh   even   if   they   are,   there&#39;s   potentially   some   security   vulnerability   in   there   somewhere,   or   else   there&#39;s   like   a   well   I   should   say   and   or   potentially   there   is   also   additionally   a   security   vulnerability,   um,   unless   there   is   some   like   centralized   system   that   is   like   proxying   and   caching   all   those,   which   I   think   is   what   Go   does.   Um   but   most   languages   I   don&#39;t   think   do   that.   Uh   like   they   don&#39;t   have   like   a,   oh,   the   last   time   anyone   downloaded   this,   we   checked   it   out   and   it   had   this   hash,   but   the   hash   has   changed   now,   so   beware,   you   know,   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   potentially   malicious.   Um   but   what   I   love   about   it   is   that   it&#39;s   just   baked   right   into   the   URL.   So   if   anyone   does   want   to,   you   know,   they   they   do   successfully   hijack   the   domain   or   whatever   are   are   otherwise   able   to   publish   that   URL,   like   what   are   they   gonna   do?   Like   if   they   want   to   publish   something   that&#39;s   different,   they   have   to   change   the   hash,   at   which   point   the   URL   becomes   different,   and   that&#39;s   not   what   people   are   gonna   be   downloading.   So
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>22:00</time>
      <p>
          Although   I   I   gotta   say   it   and   it   it   makes   for   unattractive   looking   URLs.   My   first   thought   when   I   was   looking   at   through   the   tutorial,   my   first   thought   on   the   first   example   where   it&#39;s   got   a   package   line   was   to   tell   you   like,   hmm,   maybe   you   could   come   up   with   a   shorter   URL   for   this.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>22:17</time>
      <p>
          So,   you   know,   I   that   was   my   fear   with   this   system,   and   I   thought   like,   okay,   well,   we&#39;ll   start   with   this,   and   then   we&#39;ll   see   like   how   many   complaints   we&#39;ve   gotten.   Um,   and   and   then   like,   you   know,   about   the   the   URLs   being   really   long,   and   then   like   maybe   we   can   find   you   know   some   way   to   centralize   and   like   shorten   them.   This   I&#39;m   not   even   joking.   This   just   now   is   the   first   time   I&#39;ve   ever   heard   anyone   complain   about   that.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>22:38</time>
      <p>
          Uh   I   and   I&#39;ll   I&#39;ll   tell   you   the   reason   that   that   that   I   think   you&#39;ll   never   hear   anybody   complain,   because   it   it   it   looks   bad   in   the   tutorial,   um,   but   nobody&#39;s   ever   typing   it   out.   People   are   just   copying   and   pasting   it.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>22:50</time>
      <p>
          Exactly.   That&#39;s   that&#39;s   that&#39;s   what   I   figured.   Yeah,   and   that&#39;s   what   I   do   too.   Like   I   I   I   also   never   like   write   it   out   by   hand.   Um   but   at   the   end   of   the   day,   like   I   think   that&#39;s   fine.   Like   it   has   a   lot   of   really   nice   technical   properties,   and   like   if   everyone&#39;s   just   gonna   copy-paste   it   anyway   and   then   never   really   look   at   it,   like   I   don&#39;t   know,   it   seems   fine.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>23:07</time>
      <p>
          I   think   it&#39;s   fine.   I   mean   I   guess   I   guess   the   thing   that   um   uh   you   know   eventually   once   you   have   a   package   manager,   then   you   can   shorten   a   large   part   of   the   the   URL   before   the   hash,   you   know.   You   can   just   have   it   be   rot   dot   rock.package   or   whatever.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>23:26</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   potentially.   I   mean,   so   there&#39;s   that&#39;s   a   whole   like   long   tangent   uh   discussion,   but   um   but   yeah,   it   is   definitely   something   we   potentially   can   do.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>23:35</time>
      <p>
          This   has   been   a   whirlwind   of   uh   talking   about   everything   from   Strange   Loop   to   rock.   And   the   beautiful   thing   about   rock   is   unlike   some   of   the   languages   we   talk   about,   you   can   actually   go   and   try   it   out   now.   That&#39;s   true.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>23:52</time>
      <p>
          Is   it   rock.org?   It&#39;s   uh   I   I   wish   we   had   that.   It&#39;s   uh   rock-lang.org.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>23:59</time>
      <p>
          And   and   I   and   I   do   want   to   uh   say   I   think   it&#39;s   got   a   really   good   tutorial.   Um,   and   I   uh   w   when   you   were   talking   earlier   about   how   it&#39;s   a   language   that&#39;s   meant   to   be   easy   to   use,   that   was   one   of   the   first   things   that   I   got   out   of   the   tutorial   because   the   tutorial   is   um   a   tutorial   that   I   think&#39;s   designed   approachable,   like   not   not   too   simple   for   somebody   who   has   a   lot   of   experience   programming,   but   I   think   also   if   I   was   even   like   just   learning   a   programming   language,   Earth   is   my   first   programming   language,   I   think   um   the   tutorial&#39;s   well   laid   out   for   for   a   newcomer.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>24:33</time>
      <p>
          Wow,   thank   you   so   much.   I   I   spent   a   bunch   of   time   on   it,   so   it&#39;s   great   to   hear.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>24:37</time>
      <p>
          Is   the   tutorial   uh   a   preview   of   the   new   style   for   the   upcoming   Rocklang   uh   website?   Because   the   rocklang.org   just   takes   you   to   the   what   kind   of   looks   like   you   have   a   markdown   file   and   it&#39;s   being   rendered.   But   the   rock   tutorial   has   got   lots   of   colors,   lots   of   fonts.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>24:55</time>
      <p>
          Um   you   got   that   great   font   that   uh   what   is   it?   Permanent   marker   font.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>25:00</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   Um   I&#39;ll   give   you   a   preview   after   we   sign   off   of   the   of   the   new   one.   Um   but   uh   yeah,   by   the   time   people   hear   this,   they&#39;ll   just   be   like,   what   are   you   talking   about?   This   is   just   what   the   whole   website   looks   like.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>25:12</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   yeah.   I   imagine   there&#39;s   gonna   be   some   uh   orange   site   posts   and   buzz   when   the   when   the   new   website   is   up.   Uh   or   maybe   maybe   not.   Maybe   that&#39;s   not   in   the   the   the   plan.   But   if   you   don&#39;t,   I&#39;m   sure   someone   will.   I   I   yeah.   I   I   mean   you   can   never   tell   with   these   things,   but   uh   I   wouldn&#39;t   be   surprised.   All   right,   well,   thank   you   for   taking   so   much   time   out   of   your   day   to   chat   with   us.   I   know   the   listeners,   I   mean,   they   love   when   we   chat   about   uh   cutting   edge,   bleeding   edge   programming   language   stuff.   I   mean,   we   love   chatting   about   it,   but   uh   our   listeners   I   think   also   enjoy   and   this   is   in   the   I   mean,   like   it&#39;s   not   a   C   successor   initiative,   but   it&#39;s   kind   of   in   the   uh   space   uh   if   you&#39;re   trying   to   be   fast,   you   know,   that&#39;s   that&#39;s   C   adjacent,   you   know,   even   if   it&#39;s   a   completely   different   paradigm.   So   interesting.   Uh,   you   know,   we   might   have   some   people   on   the   the   Twitters   or   whatever   the   websites   are   called   these   days.   Uh   oh   yeah,   there&#39;s   a   great   way   to   end   it.   Where   can   people   find   you?   Are   you   on   the   Twitters?   Are   you   on   the   Mastodons,   or   have   you   given   up   on   social   media   sites?   Or   uh   how   can   people   reach   out   to   you   if   they   want   to   either   get   involved   or   ask   questions?
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>26:17</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   I   I   I   I   don&#39;t   post   a   lot,   but   uh   I   am   on   Twitter,   uh   RT   Feldman,   um,   also   on   GitHub.   Uh   but   if   you   want   to   get   a   hold   of   me,   Twitter&#39;s   a   good   place   to   do   that.   Like   my   DMs   are   open,   so   uh   that&#39;s   that&#39;s   kind   of   the   main   thing   that   I   use   it   for.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>26:29</time>
      <p>
          That&#39;s   what   we   like   to   hear.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>26:31</time>
      <p>
          I   mean,   it&#39;s   what   we   like   to   hear   because   we   hope   the   site   doesn&#39;t   go   up   in   flames,   but   uh   you   know,   every   week   that   passes,   um   I   have   less   and   less   faith   in   Bryce&#39;s   conviction   that   the   site&#39;s   going   nowhere.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>26:43</time>
      <p>
          I&#39;m   telling   you,   we&#39;re   look,   look,   I&#39;m   just   a   stubborn   man.   We&#39;re   gonna   outlast   Elon.   Okay.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>26:49</time>
      <p>
          I   mean,   but   is   is   the   site   gonna   outlast   Elon?   That&#39;s   the   real   question.   We   sure   we   will   outlast   him,   but   uh   I&#39;m   telling   you,   any   day   now,   man.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>26:58</time>
      <p>
          Any   day   now.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>26:59</time>
      <p>
          All   right.   Well,   thank   you   once   again,   Richard.   Yeah,   expect   you   know,   some   amount   of   uptick   and   interest,   whether   that&#39;s   one   person   or   you   know,   several.   Um,   I&#39;m   sure   there&#39;s   gonna   be   a   few   people   checking   out   rock.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>27:11</time>
      <p>
          And   and   all   you   can   cut   this   out   if   you   want,   kind   of   everybody   go   make   a   uh   a   rock   repo   on   GitHub   in   tax   only.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>27:21</time>
      <p>
          I   mean,   we   have   several   thousand   listeners,   so   uh   if   even   a   percentage   of   you   did   that,   uh   it   would   have   to   be   even   like   if   five   percent   of   you   went   and   did   it,   uh   it   would   push   it   over   the   edge.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>27:32</time>
      <p>
          So   I   think   it&#39;s   kind   of   a   silly   GitHub   thing.   They   don&#39;t   just   like   allow   you   to   like   sell   like   they   should   have   a   model   where   you   can   self-serve   and   do   the   work   on   your   end   to   add   the   syntax.
      </p>

        <cite>Richard Feldman</cite>
      <time>27:43</time>
      <p>
          Oh,   I   think   I   think   you   do   have   to   do   it   anyway.   It&#39;s   just   they   won&#39;t   accept   your   PR   unless   I   I   think   the   reason   they   do   that   is   probably   to   prevent   like   extension   squatting   or   something   like   that.   Yeah,   yeah.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>27:51</time>
      <p>
          That   is   exactly   what   I   was   thinking.   Because   like   I   think   it&#39;s   probably   like   there&#39;s   10,000   languages   if   you   if   you   count   everyone&#39;s   pet   language,   like   um   it&#39;s   I   think   even   like   not   counting   the   pet   ones,   it&#39;s   in   the   thousands.   And   if   you   count   the   pet   ones,   then   it&#39;s   like   in   the   tens   of   thousands,   and   I   guarantee   you   there&#39;d   be   so   many   extension   clashes.   And   a   lot   of   languages   they   choose   more   than   one,   right?
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>28:11</time>
      <p>
          So   um,   okay,   fair   enough.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>28:14</time>
      <p>
          All   right,   well,   with   that,   signing   off,   and   uh   stay   tuned,   listener.   I   don&#39;t   know   what   episode   this   is.   We&#39;re   probably   on   156   to   159   inclusive,   which   means   you   might   be   hearing   from   Sean   in   episode   160,   unless   if   that&#39;s   right   around   Christmas   time,   in   which   case   we   might   be   bringing   Zach   back   on   and   having   our   holiday   special   where   we   chat   about   random   stuff,   which   is   basically   what   we   just   do   anyway.   So,   anyways,   thanks   for   coming   on   again,   Richard,   and   uh   good   luck   with   uh   rock   going   forward   and   hope   hopefully   we   uh   expect   to   see   it,   you   know,   being   used   by   the   whole   entire   world   in   a   year   in   the   future.   Well,   thanks   for   having   me.   I   appreciate   it.   This   is   fun.   Be   sure   to   check   these   show   notes   either   in   your   podcast   app   or   at   adsphepodcast.com   for   links   to   anything   we   mentioned   in   today&#39;s   episode,   as   well   as   a   link   to   the   GitHub   discussion   where   you   can   leave   comments,   thoughts,   and   questions.   Thanks   for   listening.   We   hope   you   enjoyed   and   have   a   great   day.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>29:03</time>
      <p>
          Low   quality,   high   quality,   that   is   the   tagline   of   our   podcast.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>29:08</time>
      <p>
          That&#39;s   not   the   tagline.   Our   tagline   is   chaos   with   sprinkles   of   information.
      </p>