3 ms·
The thesis of the article was "best chance". So if not rust, then what? C++ and Ada have lots of great possibilities, but those possibilities aren't making it i
by jeffdavis 6y ago
The thesis of the article was "best chance". So if not rust, then what? C++ and Ada have lots of great possibilities, but those possibilities aren't making it into practice (for whatever reason) despite a lot of time and effort.
Apparently, the author thinks that rust might make that leap sooner than Ada/C++. It seems like a reasonable guess, and with some backing by major players, it might well happen.
Sure, there's a lot of uncertainty while we are waiting to see the results from a diverse set of large projects. I have used rust enough to be annoyed by it, but none of the annoyances seemed like a major blocker to rust's future.
- jfkebwjsbx 6y ago> but those possibilities aren't making it into practice (for whatever reason) despite a lot of time and effort. What do you mean? Ada is used routinely in some industries.
- jeffdavis 6y agoBy "possibilities", I mean the possibility as an alternative to (or major safety improvement on) C++, which is what the article is talking about: "Microsoft has deemed C++ no longer acceptable...needs to move...best choice on the market today is Rust". Ada is a possibility, but it's just not there and does not show signs of being there soon. There's probably not a net movement from C++ to Ada today, and there is no reason to expect differently over the next 5 years. Rust is not a sure bet either. Lack of major real systems is a big question mark. But basically the article's thesis makes sense to me.