2 ms·
> But what if you had spent 1/10th of the time you spent learning Rust looking at these features You can write object-oriented code in C too (e.g. gtk, glib et
by imron 7y ago
> But what if you had spent 1/10th of the time you spent learning Rust looking at these features
You can write object-oriented code in C too (e.g. gtk, glib etc). It just involves much more boilerplate, and it doesn't offer the same amount of built-in safety guarantees.
So I know enough Modern C++ to use it, but why would I when there are far better alternatives?
- jcelerier 7y agothose alternatives don't always offer what C++ has - for instance template<int I> is damn useful in many cases and not many languages have that
- pjmlp 7y agoBecause those alternatives, while better at syntax + semantics part, are still quite immature at IDE + libraries + eco-system part. For example, try to use Rust to implement a UWP component callable from .NET, interacting with the Visual Layer, while using mixed mode language debugging inside Visual Studio.