3 ms·

We are long past disputes about progress in this case. So it's simply not caring about it for those who don't see beyond what they are using.

by shmerl 6y ago

ncmncm 6y ago
The issue of intrinsic merit is nowhere near as settled as you imagine, even leaving aside time wasted by Rust's extremely slow compiler. The fact remains, and will remain, that C++ can encapsulate in libraries semantics that Rust cannot, and according to the Rust core language developers will not. As a direct consequence, it is possible to program at a higher level in C++ than in Rust. This gap will get larger as more libraries are written that exercise the difference, and as C++ adopts new features that expand the difference. Within the HN echo chamber, the apparent situation is muddier because technical merits carry little weight vs. trendiness and surface sheen. How likely game programmers are to use the greater capabilities is neither here nor there; they probably see more effect from the extremely slow compiler.
- steveklabnik 6y ago
  > and according to the Rust core language developers will not. Which feature are you talking about here?
  - ncmncm 6y ago
    Numerous features, with more arriving every third year. Operator overloading, exceptions, partial specialization, template function overloading, overridden move constructors, concepts...
    - steveklabnik 6y ago
      Yes, there are many features that C++ has that Rust doesn't have, but "the devs say there never will be" is a different story. For example: * Operator overloading: Rust already does this * Exceptions: this is true, Rust will not do this. * Partial specialization: is in nightly, will be made stable * Template function overloading: not in Rust, nobody has said "never" though it is controversial * overridden move constructors: this is true, it won't happen * concepts: traits are already concepts and exist today. The situation is significantly different than you've presented. We do have several features that we need to catch up to C++ in areas, but the big ones are on the way. It's more minor or stylistic, rather than capabilities, that are maybe not gonna be a thing.

We are long past disputes about progress in this case. So it's simply not caring about it for those who don't see beyond what they are using.

by shmerl 6y ago

We are long past disputes about progress in this case. So it's simply not caring about it for those who don't see beyond what they are using.

ncmncm 6y ago

The issue of intrinsic merit is nowhere near as settled as you imagine, even leaving aside time wasted by Rust's extremely slow compiler. The fact remains, and will remain, that C++ can encapsulate in libraries semantics that Rust cannot, and according to the Rust core language developers will not. As a direct consequence, it is possible to program at a higher level in C++ than in Rust. This gap will get larger as more libraries are written that exercise the difference, and as C++ adopts new features that expand the difference. Within the HN echo chamber, the apparent situation is muddier because technical merits carry little weight vs. trendiness and surface sheen. How likely game programmers are to use the greater capabilities is neither here nor there; they probably see more effect from the extremely slow compiler.

steveklabnik 6y ago
> and according to the Rust core language developers will not. Which feature are you talking about here?
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Numerous features, with more arriving every third year. Operator overloading, exceptions, partial specialization, template function overloading, overridden move constructors, concepts...
  - steveklabnik 6y ago
    Yes, there are many features that C++ has that Rust doesn't have, but "the devs say there never will be" is a different story. For example: * Operator overloading: Rust already does this * Exceptions: this is true, Rust will not do this. * Partial specialization: is in nightly, will be made stable * Template function overloading: not in Rust, nobody has said "never" though it is controversial * overridden move constructors: this is true, it won't happen * concepts: traits are already concepts and exist today. The situation is significantly different than you've presented. We do have several features that we need to catch up to C++ in areas, but the big ones are on the way. It's more minor or stylistic, rather than capabilities, that are maybe not gonna be a thing.