(author here) That's a good question, I should've explained it better.
Technically, the other property of a puzzle is that there's exactly one good move. If you have one move that can mate in 3 and another move that can mate in 4, it's actually not a puzzle by the strict definition of the term. So, the reason I set the depth to 10 was because I'm actually looking for the second best move to be bad/losing.
For real positions, 10 might honestly be too low to confidentially state that every other move is bad, but for mate in 3 it was a good enough and still performed well.
At high enough depth the only real evaluations are #N, #-N, and 0. I’ve let stockfish sit on positions for an hour on my computer and it’ll find mate in 40. Of course in practical terms that’s computationally infeasible for your problem.
That's fair, I was definitely being a bit too general. There's another comment in this thread that summarizes it better which is asking "what would I use if Rust didn't exist?" and I think that's a more clear line. All of my embedded work was in C/asm so Rust is actually a great choice there.
Why impose the "embedded systems" space requirement on the OP? The OP does not work in embedded systems space. So it is not relevant to this article. The OP is telling us what they would do, not what you should do and definitely not what embedded systems startups should do.
It's not imposing a space requirement. It's a reminder that these generalizations have limitations. The OP isn't in the embedded space, but they do say "a startup" not "a web startup." There are embedded startups.
To me, the language agnostic answer to reducing tech debt is having a good test suite so refactoring is easier. We're pretty good on that front.
We have definitely done large refactors before, and I'm sure we'll have more in the future, but I don't think we need a major rewrite or anything like that.
This is actually something we’re working on at PropelAuth[0]. Our general philosophy is that most SP’s don’t want to deal SAML and would prefer to just have their users manage their own org membership - whether that’s via SAML, invitations, etc.
We haven’t built an API for it though, instead opting for a UI that walks the end-user through the steps of integrating with their IDP. That’s partially because every IDP is so different that we felt you really need a UI to show exactly what to do.
The SAML world is definitely a fun mess. We’re[1] building out SAML support and are beta testing it with a few customers and it is funny how different even the large IDPs are. Add in things like needing to test the integration, making sure attribute and role mappings are correct, and it’s unfortunate but understandable that companies not specializing in auth wouldn’t want to deal with it except for customers that pay a lot.
Thanks! I’m the founder of PropelAuth - our focus is providing user authentication for b2b businesses. We did a launch HN[0] a while back if you want to read more about us.
PropelAuth | Founding engineers | Remote (US) | https://www.propelauth.com
We are a dev tools company that provides useful APIs/tooling for B2B startups, starting with easy to use abstractions on top of complex authentication + authorization.
Our tech stack includes: Rust, Typescript, React, Postgres, Python, and Pulumi. We also build client libraries that support additional languages.
We just finished YC (W22), raised a seed round, and are looking to make our first few hires. It's a great time to have a really big impact!
We are a dev tools company that provides useful APIs/tooling for B2B startups, starting with easy to use abstractions on top of complex authentication + authorization.
Our tech stack includes: Rust, Typescript, React, Postgres, Python, and Pulumi. We also build client libraries that support additional languages.
We just finished YC (W22), raised a seed round, and are looking to make our first few hires. It's a great time to have a really big impact!
Technically, the other property of a puzzle is that there's exactly one good move. If you have one move that can mate in 3 and another move that can mate in 4, it's actually not a puzzle by the strict definition of the term. So, the reason I set the depth to 10 was because I'm actually looking for the second best move to be bad/losing.
For real positions, 10 might honestly be too low to confidentially state that every other move is bad, but for mate in 3 it was a good enough and still performed well.