I was a CBRN NCO and this argument is not convincing. The author significantly underestimates the operational impact of chemical weapons on modern manoeuvre warfare and the cost of CBRN counter-measures.
CBRN defence imposes a substantial burden on modern militaries. Our infantry CBRN kit alone weighed 4.5kg, roughly the same weight as ten loaded 30-round STANAG magazines. That penalty applies to every soldier and similar burdens apply to vehicles, emplacements, heavy equipment. It increases fuel consumption, maintenance, logistics.
The training burden is also significant. In my experience nearly 8% of training time was dedicated to CBRN defence, more than marksmanship or signalling.
Operating under CBRN threat severely degrades ops tempo. Buttoning up slows movement, comms, situational awareness and command effectiveness. Speed and violence of action suffer and op tempo can drop by half or more. The impact on combat support and support units is worse than combat units. Naval and air forces fare worse again, with large decontamination requirements affecting sortie tempo, all external operations, and resupply. Even without casualties, the threat alone severely degrades manoeuvre warfare. They act as a force divisor.
The author reverses the logic. Modern militaries avoid chemical weapons for political reasons, not because they are ineffective. After WW1 they became politically toxic, and the Geneva Protocol has held because any state using them today would face immediate international condemnation and serious domestic political consequences.
I have a crate with a "perfect" derive macro that generates where clauses from the fields instead of putting them on the generic parameters. It is nice when it works, but yah cyclical trait matching is still a real problem. I wound up needing an attribute to manually override the bounds whenever they blow up: https://docs.rs/inpt/latest/inpt/#bounds
> In the past, we were blocked for technical reasons from expanding implied bounds and supporting perfect derive, but I believe we have resolved those issues. So now we have to think a bit about semver and decide how much explicit we want to be.
The graphics would be called chibis, IMO (or デフォルメ if you wanna be fancy) and IDK about developers, but perhaps weaboos/weebs would be the general term
At least they appear to be partnering with Kobo "later this year" [1]. I've been a big fan of Kobo's devices so this is a nice plus. (I just wish they could figure out some way to get Kindle exclusives, but well that's a contradiction in terms, so...)
Tl;dr: its not to do with any hardware concept, the compiler can substitute any value for a read of uninitialised memory, and the value does not have to be stable.
