4 ms·

>> You get rid of bugs by working hard and testing, not language features. Hard work and testing do not solve all problems. There is a certain amount of inher

>> You get rid of bugs by working hard and testing, not language features. Hard work and testing do not solve all problems. There is a certain amount of inherent complexity in system-level and high performance application development that is not guaranteed to disappear through hard work and testing alone. >> I feel like the safety that Rust offers is balanced out by the complexity it introduces. Rust is merely exposing the complexity that is inherent to system-level and high performance application development. The same problem exists whether you use C, C++, Rust, or other programming languages that target system-level and high performance applications. The difference is that Rust points out the problems instead of the C / C++ approach of "the developer knows what they are doing".

ddevault 6y ago
To some extent, Rust exposes the complexity inherent in systems programming, through features like the borrow checker. However, it's disingenous to say that all of Rust's complexity is a reflection of complexity inherent in systems. Rust is a very complicated language, much more so than is strictly necessary to achieve its goals. It has a lot of language features which have nothing to do with addressing the complexity of systems.
- thesuperbigfrog 6y ago
  I agree that Rust is opinionated and complex. But most of the other widely-supported programming languages (that I use) for low-level and embedded development are also opinionated and complex: C++ and Ada. C is obviously not as complex, but it that is because it offers so much less. Depending on what is needed, C may be a great choice, but it generally means bringing or creating a bunch of library code for string-handling, data structures, etc.
  - ddevault 6y ago
    >C is obviously not as complex, but it that is because it offers so much less. Depending on what is needed, C may be a great choice, but it generally means bringing or creating a bunch of library code for string-handling, data structures, etc. Yes, water is wet. I think that Rust is a great alternative to C++, but I wasn't using C++, either. Part of what makes C good and desirable for those of us that use it is that very simplicity which Rust eschews.
- Thiez 6y ago
  Which features would you remove?

ddevault 6y ago

To some extent, Rust exposes the complexity inherent in systems programming, through features like the borrow checker. However, it's disingenous to say that all of Rust's complexity is a reflection of complexity inherent in systems. Rust is a very complicated language, much more so than is strictly necessary to achieve its goals. It has a lot of language features which have nothing to do with addressing the complexity of systems.

thesuperbigfrog 6y ago
I agree that Rust is opinionated and complex. But most of the other widely-supported programming languages (that I use) for low-level and embedded development are also opinionated and complex: C++ and Ada. C is obviously not as complex, but it that is because it offers so much less. Depending on what is needed, C may be a great choice, but it generally means bringing or creating a bunch of library code for string-handling, data structures, etc.
- ddevault 6y ago
  >C is obviously not as complex, but it that is because it offers so much less. Depending on what is needed, C may be a great choice, but it generally means bringing or creating a bunch of library code for string-handling, data structures, etc. Yes, water is wet. I think that Rust is a great alternative to C++, but I wasn't using C++, either. Part of what makes C good and desirable for those of us that use it is that very simplicity which Rust eschews.
Thiez 6y ago
Which features would you remove?