2 ms·

If you look at it from the assembler point of view, even function pointer structs in C have a bound on them. I can't directly speak to Rust's overloading suppo

by jerf 5y ago

If you look at it from the assembler point of view, even function pointer structs in C have a bound on them. I can't directly speak to Rust's overloading support. If it's still one static type lookup he may be ok with it, plus you have the clarity around ownership of any intervening constructions. I'm sure the Rust Evangelism Strike Force (awesome 80s cartoon music intensifies) will be along presently to answer the question of how much assembler one can generate with an overloaded operator. C++ really does have a particular ability to stack a huge number of abstractions into one little line. Ultimately it's a continuum rather than a sharp line, but C++ is really far on one side.

pdimitar 5y ago
> Rust Evangelism Strike Force I did get your point but would like to point out that using these slurs isn't helping any discussion. There are fanatics in every area everywhere. Their existence doesn't devalue any of the bigger groups they belong to. Their existence is a fact of life. I've worked with plenty of Rust devs (and I am an aspiring one myself although not all the way there yet) and I've only ever seen hard-working people with an excellent eye for detail and desire to maximally utilize the hardware and have better safety than other languages they worked with in the past. Zero fanatics.
ncmncm 5y ago
C++ and Rust both have a particular ability to integrate many abstractions in one place, all to be squeezed out by the compiler leaving exactly optimal object code for the specific uses in that specific place. Their ability to combine and particularize abstractions is a strength. Rust got it from C++ because it is so damned powerful. Just at the moment, C++ is notably better at this, in important cases, but I gather there are plans for Rust to adopt more of C++'s capabilities. The Rust designers fully understand the cases I mention, but are very busy.

by jerf 5y ago

pdimitar 5y ago

> Rust Evangelism Strike Force I did get your point but would like to point out that using these slurs isn't helping any discussion. There are fanatics in every area everywhere. Their existence doesn't devalue any of the bigger groups they belong to. Their existence is a fact of life. I've worked with plenty of Rust devs (and I am an aspiring one myself although not all the way there yet) and I've only ever seen hard-working people with an excellent eye for detail and desire to maximally utilize the hardware and have better safety than other languages they worked with in the past. Zero fanatics.

ncmncm 5y ago

C++ and Rust both have a particular ability to integrate many abstractions in one place, all to be squeezed out by the compiler leaving exactly optimal object code for the specific uses in that specific place. Their ability to combine and particularize abstractions is a strength. Rust got it from C++ because it is so damned powerful. Just at the moment, C++ is notably better at this, in important cases, but I gather there are plans for Rust to adopt more of C++'s capabilities. The Rust designers fully understand the cases I mention, but are very busy.