5 ms·
Not even close. C++ is a language that is over 30 years old. In comparison, Rust is way younger and has had many more changes and features added in a way shorte
by jfkebwjsbx 7y ago
Not even close. C++ is a language that is over 30 years old. In comparison, Rust is way younger and has had many more changes and features added in a way shorter period of time.
For good or bad.
- saagarjha 7y agoI think the rate of changes to C++ has accelerated recently as well. Until C++11 it wasn’t actually that unreasonable.
- jfkebwjsbx 7y agoEven if you add the recent additions, it is still less stuff than Rust already has. For instance, async. The problem with C++ is all the bending backwards they do to keep old code compiling and working, which is a major reason for its success.
- roel_v 7y ago"The problem with C++ is all the bending backwards they do to keep old code compiling and working" Uh, that's not a problem, it's (as you say) the main reason people use it and why they burn out on flavor of the day languages like Rust and Go (as the OP illustrates).
- Ar-Curunir 7y agoThis is funny, because with Rust you can almost certainly compile code from Rust 1.0, unless it was relying on a soundness bug. You can also seamlessly use dependencies that use newer editions of Rust; you don't have to adjust your code to do this.
- Arnavion 7y ago>Even if you add the recent additions, it is still less stuff than Rust already has. For instance, async. C++ has been trying to add generators and async functions (`co_yield` and `co_await`) for a while now. I'm almost certain they had started being discussed and were even available as preview features in some C++ compilers before Rust started implementing them.
- Arnavion 7y agoIndeed, MSVC had a preview in 2014 https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/resumable-functions-in-c/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/resumable-functions-i...
- ryuukk_ 7y agowrong, mostly stl additions, not language changes