3 ms·
> If only these mythical experienced developers that never shoot themselves in the foot actually existed. Rust is a great language, but people have to stop "ma
by j1vms 10y ago
> If only these mythical experienced developers that never shoot themselves in the foot actually existed.
Rust is a great language, but people have to stop "marketing" it by saying things like: no matter how great you are with C, you're going to fuck up at some point, so that's why you should be using Rust. Like Go or whatever other language, the main grab needs to be a positive: you know what you're doing, and here's how (a, b, c... etc.) Rust will make you even better at what you do.
Another point, it's safe to say C isn't going away anytime soon, it sits nicely at the next approximately natural level (in abstraction) above assembly. That was a design point in the language. Yes it can be a rough tool to use, but that's a reality when you get closer to the metal. You get tremendous flexibility and that comes at a price, as all things do.
- chousuke 10y agoI don't see it as a negative, really, just realistic. It is a fact that everyone makes mistakes, and with the inherent complexity and features that are demanded of modern software, it is harder and harder to maintain a comprehensive understanding of a codebase so that you can detect these mistakes before they cause damage. This means that even if you are a perfect developer, you need to expend a lot of energy to maintain that perfection if you're using tools that don't help you. To me, modern tools like Rust are supposed to relieve part of the burden. In the common case, if I can be reasonably certain that I can't make certain classes of errors, my brainpower is freed to focus on other things and I can work with significatly less stress. Rust is interesting because it allows you worry less without actually compromising much in capability. In the cases where I would need to be able to bypass the tooling, it is explicitly possible.