3 ms·

Rust might eventually get to that point, and C++ itself with QT is relatively easy if you stick to the basics. But in a way, anything trying to please both high

Rust might eventually get to that point, and C++ itself with QT is relatively easy if you stick to the basics. But in a way, anything trying to please both higher level and lower level developers is going to have to settle for some kind of middle ground. The best situation I can think right now, and the one I would adopt myself, is indeed PyQt. Mostly because Python makes it easy to drop the compute-heavy application code into C extensions, not because of the GUI toolkit itself.

notRUSTY 9y ago
Rust has been harder for me to pickup than C++. I want to like it. The problem is that the one character symbolic syntax notation remain nonsensical and seem arbitrary to me.
- yorwba 9y ago
  What exactly do you mean by "one character symbolic syntax notation"? I can't think of anything in Rust matching that description that doesn't exist in C++ as well.
  - oblio 9y ago
    I'm guessing its this: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-wiki-backup/blob/master/Sigil-reference.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-wiki-backup/blob/master/Si... -> > (eg &'a T) If you look at the popular web development languages, they don't really have sigils. Javascript/Flow/Typescript/Coffeescript (front end). Java, C#, Python, PHP (ok, I'll grant you $). Ruby is a bit of an oddball and I guess it's part of the reason Python is overtaking it. Basically, unless you've been working in C/C++, you've never really used funky symbols to denote "modifiers". Say what you will, but > public static void main is easier to Google and even to parse for most people. Keep in mind that the vaaaaaast majority of devs today have never worked professionally in C/C++. I'd imagine some of them have never even touched it, even as a hobby.
    - yorwba 9y ago
      The comment I was responding to was explicitly comparing it to C++, which is what confused me.
      - oblio 9y ago
        Oh, right.
- petre 9y ago
  You should probably try D then. It's easy to pick up and very powerful once you learn most of the language features.

notRUSTY 9y ago

Rust has been harder for me to pickup than C++. I want to like it. The problem is that the one character symbolic syntax notation remain nonsensical and seem arbitrary to me.

yorwba 9y ago
What exactly do you mean by "one character symbolic syntax notation"? I can't think of anything in Rust matching that description that doesn't exist in C++ as well.
- oblio 9y ago
  I'm guessing its this: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-wiki-backup/blob/master/Sigil-reference.md https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-wiki-backup/blob/master/Si... -> > (eg &'a T) If you look at the popular web development languages, they don't really have sigils. Javascript/Flow/Typescript/Coffeescript (front end). Java, C#, Python, PHP (ok, I'll grant you $). Ruby is a bit of an oddball and I guess it's part of the reason Python is overtaking it. Basically, unless you've been working in C/C++, you've never really used funky symbols to denote "modifiers". Say what you will, but > public static void main is easier to Google and even to parse for most people. Keep in mind that the vaaaaaast majority of devs today have never worked professionally in C/C++. I'd imagine some of them have never even touched it, even as a hobby.
  - yorwba 9y ago
    The comment I was responding to was explicitly comparing it to C++, which is what confused me.
    - oblio 9y ago
      Oh, right.
petre 9y ago
You should probably try D then. It's easy to pick up and very powerful once you learn most of the language features.