4 ms·

> And for Mozilla it was a huge distraction, one they could ill afford. This is demonstrably false. Rust was designed for use in browser development, and it ha

> And for Mozilla it was a huge distraction, one they could ill afford. This is demonstrably false. Rust was designed for use in browser development, and it has successfully been adopted into Firefox. The payback is increased security, stability, and Firefox developer productivity.

jacquesm 6y ago
You don't design a language for 'browser development'. You design a language because you feel there is a need for a language and none of the existing languages meet your needs. If Mozilla had adopted D instead of developing Rust the world would have kept on turning and they'd be further along compared to where they are today. None of the other major browsers are written in Rust, there does not seem to be a huge difference in the number of security issues listed for any of those. I once worked at a company where they wanted to build everything, preferably including their own operating system programming language and database. And all that four a payment processor, something you could probably write in any language available. Guess where that story ended? If something isn't core to your proposition it is a distraction.
- AsyncAwait 6y ago
  > If Mozilla had adopted D instead of developing Rust the world would have kept on turning and they'd be further along compared to where they are today. D has the complexity of C++ with major drawbacks, (the stdlib was tightly tied to GC for example). Just look at D's marketshare and its overall time on the market. If you argument is that literally any Turing-complete language would somehow do then bravo for missing the point of basically every language besides asm.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    D's market share is still much larger than Rust's, though clearly Rust is winning that battle in the longer term. Not that 'D' isn't without its flaws but those could have been fixed for a small fraction of the effort that went into making Rust. And no, your strawman doesn't hold.
    - AsyncAwait 6y ago
      > D's market share is still much larger than Rusts. D has been on the market for significantly longer than Rust and reached 1.0 full 8 years before Rust had a 1.0 release, so not surprising at all. But the rate at which Rust is being adopted is much faster than that of D. Moreover Rust brings something novel to the table and even inspiring other popular languages, like Swift, in the process. D has nothing that I'd consider novel. So personally I'll trade D for Rust any day. Luckily, we don't have to pick.
      - jacquesm 6y ago
        I think when all this has run its course that the only thing that will remain will be Rust. So maybe that was worth it.

jacquesm 6y ago

You don't design a language for 'browser development'. You design a language because you feel there is a need for a language and none of the existing languages meet your needs. If Mozilla had adopted D instead of developing Rust the world would have kept on turning and they'd be further along compared to where they are today. None of the other major browsers are written in Rust, there does not seem to be a huge difference in the number of security issues listed for any of those. I once worked at a company where they wanted to build everything, preferably including their own operating system programming language and database. And all that four a payment processor, something you could probably write in any language available. Guess where that story ended? If something isn't core to your proposition it is a distraction.

AsyncAwait 6y ago
> If Mozilla had adopted D instead of developing Rust the world would have kept on turning and they'd be further along compared to where they are today. D has the complexity of C++ with major drawbacks, (the stdlib was tightly tied to GC for example). Just look at D's marketshare and its overall time on the market. If you argument is that literally any Turing-complete language would somehow do then bravo for missing the point of basically every language besides asm.
- jacquesm 6y ago
  D's market share is still much larger than Rust's, though clearly Rust is winning that battle in the longer term. Not that 'D' isn't without its flaws but those could have been fixed for a small fraction of the effort that went into making Rust. And no, your strawman doesn't hold.
  - AsyncAwait 6y ago
    > D's market share is still much larger than Rusts. D has been on the market for significantly longer than Rust and reached 1.0 full 8 years before Rust had a 1.0 release, so not surprising at all. But the rate at which Rust is being adopted is much faster than that of D. Moreover Rust brings something novel to the table and even inspiring other popular languages, like Swift, in the process. D has nothing that I'd consider novel. So personally I'll trade D for Rust any day. Luckily, we don't have to pick.
    - jacquesm 6y ago
      I think when all this has run its course that the only thing that will remain will be Rust. So maybe that was worth it.