Lol nerd. Good one though

That’s what I heard. That’s what people are saying.

Ah I didn’t realize most people have moved onto OnceCell. The issue with both lazy static and oncecell is that they can only be assigned to once. You need a global mutable state, so neither OnceCell or lazy_static are the right choice.

You’re going to be fighting the borrow checker if you try to have global mutable state. It will bite you eventually. You can potentially use an interior mutablity pattern along with a mutex. Have you looked into interior mutability?

Very cool. I’ll have to try it out. I just started using React, and I’m beginning to love it. React with rust sounds like heaven.

Maybe lazy_static? Personally I’d just pass a borrow to the vec around. It’s very common for programs to have some global state that they pass around to different parts.

Woah. First I’ve heard of dioxus. Has anyone here tried it?

Lol not a great name choice. Wish I would have thought of it though.

I get why the binary is there, but there really should be a simple way to force compilation instead of downloading a precompiled binary.

Serde is incredible though, so it can get away with basically anything it wants.

No, I haven’t. He keeps getting away with shit.

I haven’t seen any evidence he will ever face consequences. I hope I’m wrong.

That’s exactly what this is.

Ideally, all of these values should be represented in memory exactly the same way:

That would make the game hard to play, since you’d have to think about where your move would end up since it won’t stay on the cell you click.

I think you’re wanting to store them that way so that you can easily check for win conditions, maybe? But that’s the wrong approach. Store the cells as they appear to the player, in a 2d Array (or 1d Array with indexing math. That’s how I’d do it).

Then you can take advantage of symmetries in your win condition code, if you like. But it really couldn’t be much simpler than counting the matching cells in each row, column, and diagonal. That’s just 8 groups of 3.

Right? What’s with that? It’s like everyone gets their crate to the minimal working state and stops workings on it.

Oh I see. I misunderstood the reason for wanting it represented as an int.

I’m wondering if you could just create a wrapper type that only has an int as a member, but then implement a trait on it so that it can act like a result. That, or just pass around your int type in the rust code, and when you need it to act like a result you do a conversion from int to result. Your debugger wouldn’t show it as an int at that point, but it wouldn’t show any other Result as an int anyway so it would br consistent with other rust code. If this still doesn’t work, you could even make a struct that contains both the int and the result and keeps then synchronized. Then, when debugging, you could look into that struct and see the int value like you want.

I started trying out JUCE. It’s a framework for making audio plugins (VSTs). Though I think I’m going to give the rust solution another shot with Vizia.

If you can only hit one stud, you should hit it in two places vertically if possible. Bottom shelf and top shelf if you can. You can still add some anchors if you need, but that works for most things. I hang cabinets into single studs all the time just by screwing it in two spots. It will work as long as the shelf or cabinet is built well enough.

How are you running the executable? From command line?

If those hooks on the top corners are a multiple of 16" apart, and they line up with studs, you could use some 2-3" screws through those into studs.

If they don’t line up with studs, you could stain a piece of lumber close to the same color and screw it to the wall through the studs and screw the shelf down to that board. It would act as a ledge for one of the shelves to sit on.

There’s no back so there’s no easy way to directly screw this shelf to the wall. You’ll have to get creative.

You could find the studs and put screws angled through one of the shelves into the studs. Screw from underneath the shelf if it’s lower than eye level, above the shelf if it’s above eye level. This is so you don’t see the screws.

You could get realy fancy and use a pocket hole jig to make nice holes for your angled screws.

Good luck with it. What’s it called?

Well if you want to keep an int as an int, then use an int. If you want to use Results, use results. Like I said to the other commenter: unless this code is in a very tight loop where performance is crucial, you’ll be fine just implementing From/Into to change your Result to and from an int. You’re already crossing a language boundary by calling c code from Rust. Is it that much more of an issue to just convert the types when you need to?

Trying to store the results as an int in some magical way just screams premature optimization. You have abstraction tools at your disposal. They may not be zero cost, but they are cheap. Use them.