From 3a1272c94f43e8b71811f910517b6ac2e44b94d8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Leonardo Santiago Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:15:49 -0300 Subject: delete public/ it must be automatically generated by workflow, no need to include it --- public/index.xml | 26 -------------------------- 1 file changed, 26 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 public/index.xml (limited to 'public/index.xml') diff --git a/public/index.xml b/public/index.xml deleted file mode 100644 index 865aaf4..0000000 --- a/public/index.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,26 +0,0 @@ - - - - home on lowest case - https://o-santi.github.com/ - Recent content in home on lowest case - Hugo - en-US - Sat, 01 Jun 2024 18:59:08 -0300 - - - about - https://o-santi.github.com/about/ - Sat, 01 Jun 2024 18:59:08 -0300 - https://o-santi.github.com/about/ - i’m leonardo santiago, a software engineer based in brazil. my interests are in compiler design, programming tools (emacs), functional programming, and proof languages. i’m most confortable in nix and rust, but i know a fair share of other languages. currently, i work as a software engineer @ Mixrank, and you can find my curriculum here. if you feel like smugly responding to any of my posts (or just want to kindly send me a message), these are my socials: - - - rust is not about memory safety - https://o-santi.github.com/blog/rust-is-not-about-memory-safety/ - Sat, 01 Jun 2024 18:59:08 -0300 - https://o-santi.github.com/blog/rust-is-not-about-memory-safety/ - most of rust discussions nowadays revolve about memory safety, and how it is safer than C / C++ / zig / go / whatever language is being trashed on twitter that day. while yes, that is true - not that the bar for most of these is particularly high - what I think is the main point of the language is always glossed over: correctness. when one tries to criticize any of the aforementioned languages, one is answered with the following argument: - - - -- cgit v1.2.3