4 ms·
I should've been clearer: For low-level programming, Rust is already fine as it is. What I want is a high-level language that offers some of the benefits of Rus
by catnaroek 10y ago
I should've been clearer: For low-level programming, Rust is already fine as it is. What I want is a high-level language that offers some of the benefits of Rust (safe deterministic non-memory resource management), without the unnecessarily low-level features (sized types and overemphasis on unique ownership). Due to its C++ heritage, Rust has a tendency to conflate ownership (a high-level concern) with indirection (a low-level one), which is fine for the niche it targets, but too inflexible for general-purpose programming, IMO.
- fridsun 10y agoOCaml or Haskell.
- catnaroek 10y agoNeither OCaml nor Haskell has substructural types. There's no way to tell their type systems “you can't use a file after it's been closed”. In fact, what I want can be summarized as “ML plus substructural types”! (But preferably with Standard ML as the base point, since OCaml has way too many warts for my taste.)