3 ms·

> It seems you take an issue with the rising popularity of Rust. But let me ask you this: if you are so confident in C/C++'s superiority, why are you bothered?

> It seems you take an issue with the rising popularity of Rust. But let me ask you this: if you are so confident in C/C++'s superiority, why are you bothered? I don't have a problem with Rust at all. It's a fine tool and I'd be happy to use it (and have), just like any other. I work on interesting problems and am tools-agnostic (aside from certain languages being suited or not to specific domains). I have a problem with people who lose their objectivity as a result of their enthusiasm for Rust and go around shouting in every project like it's the most important thing to happen in the last 30 years of Computer Science. It wouldn't be such a meme if people didn't actually friggin' do this.

pdimitar 6y ago
> I have a problem with people who lose their objectivity as a result of their enthusiasm for Rust and go around shouting in every project like it's the most important thing to happen in the last 30 years of Computer Science. It's an annoying trend the last 4-5 years. I hear this a lot and I've never witnessed it once. ;) It's all filter bubbles, dude. Chill. The world is not ending. As an example: the comments from both Linus/Greg and the Rust community that relate to the OP are quite balanced and nobody is shouting for revolutions. --- ...That being said, I wouldn't make grandiose claims about Rust myself even if it solved a lot of problems for me, but still: Rust is an important innovation regardless. It seems a lot of the software area has chased its own tail before we had some languages step forward and solve various problems that people kept trying to fix themselves on an ad-hoc basis (and kept failing at it). Rust is one example, Erlang/Elixir are another, and when OCaml finally gains parallel abilities, it will be an additional (and very fine) example as well. Surely other examples exist. If we're now discussing just the point you quoted me on -- I on my side take issue with the people who are way too liberal and love to pretend that it doesn't matter what language is being used regardless of the business and technical problems. Because oh my god yes, yes it does matter. A lot.
- lenkite 6y ago
  All new languages are extremely important innovations until they age a bit and get severe warts. Rust is already getting them. See: https://theta.eu.org/2021/03/08/async-rust-2.html https://theta.eu.org/2021/03/08/async-rust-2.html Rust is already getting foot-guns like C++ did. Modern C++ (>C++17) with RAII and neat libraries is already an elegant, high performance and high-productivity language with good IDE/editor support. And its not like C++ is standing still. You have standardised concepts, modules and co-routines out this year. Modules will fix several of C++'s shortcomings wrt build tooling and setup. I am personally looking forward to C++ 20 co-routine support in all the major compilers - will enable one to develop graceful-async, portable and stable libraries without all that Rust churn needing re-writes all the time. Competition is good, but its best to take the Rust blinkers off a bit.
  - pdimitar 6y ago
    Don't get me wrong -- I agree Rust has some footguns. And I had high hopes for the 2021 Edition to introduce some terser syntax here and there but alas, not happening. I am not fangirling for Rust at all. I am saying that it's much easier to make costly mistakes in C and legacy C++. I am aware of the modern efforts in C++ but they don't help with the literal mountains of legacy code that has to be maintained out there...

pdimitar 6y ago

> I have a problem with people who lose their objectivity as a result of their enthusiasm for Rust and go around shouting in every project like it's the most important thing to happen in the last 30 years of Computer Science. It's an annoying trend the last 4-5 years. I hear this a lot and I've never witnessed it once. ;) It's all filter bubbles, dude. Chill. The world is not ending. As an example: the comments from both Linus/Greg and the Rust community that relate to the OP are quite balanced and nobody is shouting for revolutions. --- ...That being said, I wouldn't make grandiose claims about Rust myself even if it solved a lot of problems for me, but still: Rust is an important innovation regardless. It seems a lot of the software area has chased its own tail before we had some languages step forward and solve various problems that people kept trying to fix themselves on an ad-hoc basis (and kept failing at it). Rust is one example, Erlang/Elixir are another, and when OCaml finally gains parallel abilities, it will be an additional (and very fine) example as well. Surely other examples exist. If we're now discussing just the point you quoted me on -- I on my side take issue with the people who are way too liberal and love to pretend that it doesn't matter what language is being used regardless of the business and technical problems. Because oh my god yes, yes it does matter. A lot.

lenkite 6y ago
All new languages are extremely important innovations until they age a bit and get severe warts. Rust is already getting them. See: https://theta.eu.org/2021/03/08/async-rust-2.html https://theta.eu.org/2021/03/08/async-rust-2.html Rust is already getting foot-guns like C++ did. Modern C++ (>C++17) with RAII and neat libraries is already an elegant, high performance and high-productivity language with good IDE/editor support. And its not like C++ is standing still. You have standardised concepts, modules and co-routines out this year. Modules will fix several of C++'s shortcomings wrt build tooling and setup. I am personally looking forward to C++ 20 co-routine support in all the major compilers - will enable one to develop graceful-async, portable and stable libraries without all that Rust churn needing re-writes all the time. Competition is good, but its best to take the Rust blinkers off a bit.
- pdimitar 6y ago
  Don't get me wrong -- I agree Rust has some footguns. And I had high hopes for the 2021 Edition to introduce some terser syntax here and there but alas, not happening. I am not fangirling for Rust at all. I am saying that it's much easier to make costly mistakes in C and legacy C++. I am aware of the modern efforts in C++ but they don't help with the literal mountains of legacy code that has to be maintained out there...