3 ms·
"I can't answer for Patrick, but I don't see the term "automatic memory management" as useful as distinction, I look at it more as a spectrum, and Rust/C++ fall
by winstonewert 10y ago
"I can't answer for Patrick, but I don't see the term "automatic memory management" as useful as distinction, I look at it more as a spectrum, and Rust/C++ fall squarely on the "more manual" end of that."
I agree 100%. My objection was to the assertion that Rust and Swift were completely different because Swift was garbage collected and Rust was not. That's just not a helpful way of looking at it, because in many ways Swift's strategy is closer to Rust's then Java's.
- Manishearth 10y agoRight, which is why in my other comment I explained why the memory management strategies make them different, and make that difference important :) type system wise they are pretty comparable otherwise; As a Rustacean who is used to nice type systems, Swift's type system is a pleasure to work with.
- winstonewert 10y agoSure there are significant differences between Rust and Swift. But characterizing that as Swift = GC, Rust = No GC, as I was originally objecting to is a pretty terrible way of describing it.
- Manishearth 10y agoRight, but the significant difference does lie in the memory management thing. GC/No GC is (a) correct, according to the academic definition, and (b) a decent approximation to the difference.