3 ms·
I agree with the general sentiment: "There are no silver bullets, only tradeoffs." However I disagree that that is the issue at hand. At the very least the trad
by PuercoPop 11y ago
I agree with the general sentiment: "There are no silver bullets, only tradeoffs." However I disagree that that is the issue at hand. At the very least the trade off is on the wrong side of the equation, it is computers that should do stuff like bound checking not humans.
P.D. It irks me that Rust slogan is 'zero cost' abstraction. There is definitely a cost. The memory model is more complex than C. One shouldn't try to hide the tradeoffs behind 'marketing' slogans.
- pcwalton 11y agoWell, the term "zero cost" is just borrowed from C++, where it means exactly the same thing: more expressiveness, more features, and a higher learning curve with no runtime performance cost. But I do agree with you that there is a learning curve, and some things that are more easily expressible in C are not as easily expressible in Rust (and vice versa). It's undeniable that writing a doubly linked list from scratch in Rust is more involved than doing the same in C (which is a tradeoff I'm glad we made, but like all tradeoffs it has a downside).
- PuercoPop 11y agoI am aware that it comes from C++. 'Excesive Marketing' is something that seems to pervade through software, not trying to single out Rust. I think 'zero runtime cost abstraction' would be a small improvement for the slogan.