3 ms·
> > “I think C++ can do anything Rust can do, and I would like it to be much simpler to use.” > I think Bjarne isn't getting the issue with C++. In my opinion
by zamalek 6y ago
> > “I think C++ can do anything Rust can do, and I would like it to be much simpler to use.”
> I think Bjarne isn't getting the issue with C++.
In my opinion, put succinctly, the issue with C++ is that it can do things that Rust can't. And, as it turns out, most of the things that it can do over Rust aren't important for solving problems (one of those things is explicit memory management).
> Rust people [...] accuse [...] stolen
There is something that many developers struggle with, and it seems to be cropping up here. You are not your work, folks. Go back and honestly look at your very old code, it's probably not good, it's probably not good at all. There's no reason to be ashamed of that, because your work is not your identity.
If your work becomes your identity, you lose the ability to critique your own work objectively (biologically/psychologically), which really impedes your ability to improve your work.
- d1zzy 6y agoBut do you agree that Rust stole many things from C++? Because that was his point, the whole argument about developers identifying with their work seems to sidetrack the original discussion.
- zamalek 6y agoOf course Rust "stole" many things, there wouldn't be much of a language if it didn't. C++ is a crucial piece of history in the evolution of programming languages. > the whole argument about developers identifying Taking inspiration from C++ is inseparable from developing a language today. Arguing about who "stole" ideas is sidetracking the overall discussion, in the first place. The development of C++ is being hampered by the perception of a threat/enemy who "steals" ideas - which is a very human and normal way to act. If the discussion is "them/Rust" vs. "us/C++", then the reasoning behind that counterproductive mindset is worth talking about.