12 ms·
Of course, it all depends on your background. For me, the only part that took getting used to was the borrow checker. However, I'm not really sure the learning
by wtetzner 6y ago
Of course, it all depends on your background. For me, the only part that took getting used to was the borrow checker.
However, I'm not really sure the learning curve for C++ is lower. There's a lot more to learn, and there's a good chance that you're just writing incorrect programs if you haven't gone through the effort of learning about ownership semantics anyway. Does that mean you've learned the language, or just that the compiler doesn't care?
- nilkn 6y agoI'm always extremely skeptical when I see people claim C++ is easier than Rust. Rust essentially just makes you default to good practices in modern C++ and forces you to be explicit about things like copying data, allocating on the heap, etc. If C++ feels easier, it's because you either already know it and you're comparing it to something you don't know, or it's because your C++ code is actually very different than your Rust code (lots of heap allocations and copies vs. lots of stack allocations and moves), or it's because your C++ code has a lot of bugs that you haven't encountered yet.
- zozbot234 6y agoC++ feels easier because we have 30 years' experience with teaching it to novices as a first programming language. That counts for a lot. We still don't quite know how to do this with Rust.