3 ms·
I'm 100% with you. There is often a debate in the D community how the defaults could have been better: pure, @safe, const by default, no GC by default etc. Bu
by p0nce 8y ago
I'm 100% with you.
There is often a debate in the D community how the defaults could have been better: pure, @safe, const by default, no GC by default etc.
But not every bit of code need to be perfect. Code must prove its usefulness first and foremost, before the need to be reliable, safe, fast and beautiful even enter the picture.
I'd go as far as to say, thinking of a nascent project as something perfect and beautiful likely leads to over-idealization and will delay the time to completion many-folds.
Ability to write ugly code is - for me - a feature.
- yoklov 8y agoYou can still write hacky temp code in Rust, although it does take some experience to get familiar with the ways you can do this without hitting borrow checker errors and etc (well, short of reaching for unsafe, which is generally not a good way to do this). That said, for getting code written fast, Rust for me has been better than C++ for a while now, even though for most of that I was better at C++ than Rust. The reason for this was largely Cargo, which eliminates the pain points of dependency and build management that plague C++.