IMO, the most telling point of this is when the author rejected a security patch because it was not creative enough. He was more of an artist than an engineer.
What was the patch? It was very strait forward, simple, uncreative change, intention was just to remove unsafe not to fix existing code. I believe software development is one of the most creative work we do, and creativity is part of why we love software development, why it is fun. Especially if you combine it with real world projects constraints. “creative constrains” could be source of very interesting solutions. Being on the edge of your abilities is super fun. So uncreative change felt boringhttps://github.com/actix/actix-web
The project was not promoted as that for a long time. That "view" on what the project was only came yesterday, when yet another security hole was identified and a patch was prepared.
The impact of that patch would have likely caused actix to no longer be at the top of the techempower benchmarks.
What was the patch? It was very strait forward, simple, uncreative change, intention was just to remove unsafe not to fix existing code. I believe software development is one of the most creative work we do, and creativity is part of why we love software development, why it is fun. Especially if you combine it with real world projects constraints. “creative constrains” could be source of very interesting solutions. Being on the edge of your abilities is super fun. So uncreative change felt boring https://github.com/actix/actix-web