3 ms·
Seconded that dipping a toe in to Rust has changed how I think about C++ and object ownership. Loose pointers and copy constructors now make me feel un-clean!
by midnightclubbed 6y ago
Seconded that dipping a toe in to Rust has changed how I think about C++ and object ownership. Loose pointers and copy constructors now make me feel un-clean! Move ftw.
However I feel like most of the heavy lifting features came with C++11.
Span, optional, variant and string_view are nice additions to the toolkit but more as enhancements rather than the paradigm shift of C++11 (move, unique_ptr, lambdas et-al).
- asveikau 6y ago> Seconded that dipping a toe in to Rust has changed how I think about C++ and object ownership. Loose pointers and copy constructors now make me feel un-clean! Move ftw. It's funny, because while it's certainly become more influential lately, that subculture existed as a niche in the C++ world before Rust and before C++11. So much so that when I first heard about Rust I thought "these are C++ people."
- Yoric 6y agoThe original (and long dead) Rust irc channel used to be full of C++ people chatting with OCaml people. Those were the days :)
- sitkack 6y agoThat entirely matches my idea of how Rust came to be, some sort of pragmatic co-development across two different philosophical camps. In many ways, Rust is a spiritual successor to both languages, if only it was easier to integrate with C++.
- typon 6y agolol i start most of my big objects by deleting the copy constructor and adding a clone member func :P