Can you explain how this is relevant here?

Adding a new feature to unify existing features is perfectly isomorphic to defining a new standard to unify existing standards.

It's not though, unless the new feature and existing features continue to exist as disjoint things. If the new feature subsumes the old ones, then you've reduced the number of features in the language.

The same is true of standards.

I think there's still value in generic AST-level operations. Like expand selection and shrink selection. Or select around the current node vs select inside (whatever that means for the current node type).

We've had clear, legible printer icons for decades.

Especially now that they've made RAM so expensive.

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be easy to understand what studies are actually demonstrating, based on how often you see people making giant leaps to conclusions that don't really follow from study results.

> It is not something that helps anything at all physically.

That's a pretty strong claim to make.

It's not a strong claim. It's a settled one. The literature on blue light filters and screen-emitted blue light at display intensities is clear and has been for years, even if approaching it from first principles isn't convincing, or the first principles aren't known.

The thing about color science is that everyone has eyes, so everyone assumes they already have the full picture. One can experience warm light feeling "nicer," and the jump to "this is physically helping me" feels so self-evident that anyone saying otherwise must be the one making a strong claim. But "I prefer the aesthetic" and "this is physiologically beneficial" are two completely different statements, and only one of them survives controlled study.

I don't care if people use night shift. I'm not trying to take anyone's warm tint away. But we are now in an era where consumer displays are pushing luminance levels that are physically, measurably significant - not "I feel like it's bright" significant, but "this is a fundamentally different amount of light entering your eye" significant. Getting the basics right matters now in a way it didn't when we were all staring into dim LCDs and the worst case was people shifting white balance so the color temperature was incandescent, not D65.

so whats the takeaway? just turn down the brightness off your monitors? the blue light option of my benq monitor doesnt help?

Correct - more or less, I love BenQs but haven't had one in a few years. Dunno what exactly their blue light filter does. A software-based nightlight is usually going to turn whites offwhite, i.e. the yellowing you see is effectively darkening / lowering brightness. Its just, its accidentally fixing it and the fix is much less than it would be by directly lowering brightness.

Regardless of "health benefits", the phrase "you can feel" seems pretty relevant when it comes to what someone finds comfortable.

> they've done a grand job of royally fucking up the colors of whatever's on screen.

Pretty sure that's the point?

> Why does Rust standard library use libc?

Because that's the stable public interface provided by pretty much every OS except Linux. On Linux, if you don't want to depend on the OS-supplied libc, you can use musl.

I don't think GP is arguing that's the best way to design an OS, just that interfacing with non-Linux Unixes is best done via libc, because that's the stable public interface.