4 ms·

It wasn't that nasty. Might just be because I have no sympathy for people saying things like they are fact, yet don't know what they are talking about.

cbHXBY1D 9y ago
Except the context of the quote was OS architecture so dmitrygr was correct -- Rust will not provide different OS architectures. Moreover, it was mean-spirited. Probably because they were reacting to the second part of dmitrygr's quote.
- steveklabnik 9y ago
  On a fundamental level, sure, a new language doesn't inherently make a new architecture possible. But you have to think of it from an affordance perspective: what architecture does Rust make easier or better? Consider the Stylo project in Firefox, for example. Yes, Mozilla could have done the parallelization in C++ instead of Rust. They even tried! Twice! But it failed both times. That doesn't mean that it's impossible. In my experience, this is what people mean when they say things like this.
  - cbHXBY1D 9y ago
    Sure, but you're moving the goalposts :) Look, I'm a big fan of Rust - I want to see it succeed. I go to Rust meetups in my city, I've advocated for it's adoption in my company, yadda yadda. But I don't these vague half-truths are good for the language or the community. In fact, I think they'll be harmful to the community over time as the language will fail to live up to expectations. When I started programming, Java was in the position of Rust. It was being given so many vague platitudes that it experienced push back a few years later as developers realized it didn't fix all their problems. I don't mean for this post to be mean or condescending. Tone is hard to transmit over the internet.
    - steveklabnik 9y ago
      I don’t think it’s moving the goalposts. It’s where they were set in the first place. Furthermore, nobody is making promises of solving all the problems, the OP said they were interested to see what might happen, which is a very different statement than “this will happen” or “this will happen and fix everything.” That is, I 100% agree with your comment, but I don’t see it happening in this thread.
    - hateduser2 9y ago
      How is that a vague half truth? Just because it’s not concrete doesn’t mean it’s either vague or only half true

cbHXBY1D 9y ago

Except the context of the quote was OS architecture so dmitrygr was correct -- Rust will not provide different OS architectures. Moreover, it was mean-spirited. Probably because they were reacting to the second part of dmitrygr's quote.

steveklabnik 9y ago
On a fundamental level, sure, a new language doesn't inherently make a new architecture possible. But you have to think of it from an affordance perspective: what architecture does Rust make easier or better? Consider the Stylo project in Firefox, for example. Yes, Mozilla could have done the parallelization in C++ instead of Rust. They even tried! Twice! But it failed both times. That doesn't mean that it's impossible. In my experience, this is what people mean when they say things like this.
- cbHXBY1D 9y ago
  Sure, but you're moving the goalposts :) Look, I'm a big fan of Rust - I want to see it succeed. I go to Rust meetups in my city, I've advocated for it's adoption in my company, yadda yadda. But I don't these vague half-truths are good for the language or the community. In fact, I think they'll be harmful to the community over time as the language will fail to live up to expectations. When I started programming, Java was in the position of Rust. It was being given so many vague platitudes that it experienced push back a few years later as developers realized it didn't fix all their problems. I don't mean for this post to be mean or condescending. Tone is hard to transmit over the internet.
  - steveklabnik 9y ago
    I don’t think it’s moving the goalposts. It’s where they were set in the first place. Furthermore, nobody is making promises of solving all the problems, the OP said they were interested to see what might happen, which is a very different statement than “this will happen” or “this will happen and fix everything.” That is, I 100% agree with your comment, but I don’t see it happening in this thread.
  - hateduser2 9y ago
    How is that a vague half truth? Just because it’s not concrete doesn’t mean it’s either vague or only half true