3 ms·

This only applies now because fundamental aspects of a competent modern language are still being added - it was only recent that you could have a const fn at al

by zanny 7y ago

This only applies now because fundamental aspects of a competent modern language are still being added - it was only recent that you could have a const fn at all, async is only coming at the end of the year, there are still no HKTs, etc. I'd be willing to bet Rust 2021 will be a great place to start at because it will represent 95% of what the language will become having already been put in place. From that point there will certainly be additions to the language in the forms of libraries and features but the mechanisms of how you write code in general will be solidified. Until then yea, theres a lot of churn along the way to having a "mostly complete" language, especially when the point of the language is to basically be a kitchen sink of everything.

foldr 7y ago
I really think that could go either way. Haskell keeps getting new bells and whistles with no sign of any slow down. Once you get into sophisticated type systems, it's never "done". There's always going to be (semantically) safe code that doesn't type check in safe Rust, and the temptation to extend the type system to rectify that.
- wtetzner 7y ago
  But Haskell is intentionally used as a laboratory to experiment with new ideas. That is not Rust's primary goal.
  - foldr 7y ago
    It's not C++'s goal either, AFAIK, but major new features keep getting added to the language anyway.
  - centril 7y ago
    An interesting example is the addition of `{-# LANGUAGE LinearTypes #-}` to GHC. The primary interest for this "experiment" is not from academia but from industry (tweag IO). Another example is `QuantifiedConstraints` which was quickly caught up by practical applications as well. Haskell is not just for academia, it is very much intended for practical use after all.
    - wtetzner 7y ago
      It is intended by it's creators as a research language. That doesn't mean it isn't suitable for practical use, it just means that you should expect it to continue to gain features and grow in complexity.

by zanny 7y ago

foldr 7y ago

I really think that could go either way. Haskell keeps getting new bells and whistles with no sign of any slow down. Once you get into sophisticated type systems, it's never "done". There's always going to be (semantically) safe code that doesn't type check in safe Rust, and the temptation to extend the type system to rectify that.

wtetzner 7y ago
But Haskell is intentionally used as a laboratory to experiment with new ideas. That is not Rust's primary goal.
- foldr 7y ago
  It's not C++'s goal either, AFAIK, but major new features keep getting added to the language anyway.
- centril 7y ago
  An interesting example is the addition of `{-# LANGUAGE LinearTypes #-}` to GHC. The primary interest for this "experiment" is not from academia but from industry (tweag IO). Another example is `QuantifiedConstraints` which was quickly caught up by practical applications as well. Haskell is not just for academia, it is very much intended for practical use after all.
  - wtetzner 7y ago
    It is intended by it's creators as a research language. That doesn't mean it isn't suitable for practical use, it just means that you should expect it to continue to gain features and grow in complexity.