4 ms·
Sure, but those are different tradeoffs than those listed above. And some of the warts with C++ templates might not be inherent to supporting the features that
by weberc2 8y ago
Sure, but those are different tradeoffs than those listed above. And some of the warts with C++ templates might not be inherent to supporting the features that C++ templates offer over Rust generics--for example, what features are enabled by error messages that point into the expansion of a template rather than a type error at the template itself?
- burntsushi 8y agoThey aren't different. The last bullet point in munificient's comment is a point about expressiveness. I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make here. This really shouldn't be controversial.
- weberc2 8y agoFair point, I missed the last bullet. To me, munificent's comment reads like a false dichotomy--you either have the Java's problems or C++'s problems. I was pointing out that there are other systems that largely have neither--namely that you can have template-based generics that perform better than Java and are friendlier than C++. He may well not have meant it that way, but that's the context for understanding my posts.