3 ms·

I'm pretty sure C++ advances much faster now than Rust will in 30 years. Then again, you'll just point to how awesome it is that Rust doesn't change and stays

I'm pretty sure C++ advances much faster now than Rust will in 30 years. Then again, you'll just point to how awesome it is that Rust doesn't change and stays stable and easy to use for years. It's all just rationalizations for the emotional investments you've already made.

nickysielicki 5y ago
Scarecrow. I’m far from emotionally invested in rust and I’ve dealt with the downvote army of zealots who want to rewrite everything in rust. I’m not the evangelist you think I am. C++ is just losing here.
- titanomachy 5y ago
  Is “scarecrow” the same thing as “strawman”?
  - nickysielicki 5y ago
    A scarecrow is a straw-man. :)
  - elondaits 5y ago
    Strawman is less offensive.
    - nickysielicki 5y ago
      Wait, “scarecrow” is offensive now? How?
      - bregma 5y ago
        If it only had a brain?
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  Agreed (and I'm dealing with an army of Rust zealots right now on proggit). Rust has a track record of carefully considered features and a process that allows it to continue making changes to the language while managing compatibility. I do expect Rust will slow down and bureaucracy will slip in in the next 30 years (because I fully believe Rust will become very popular and many big companies will come to depend on it for security and critical real time systems), but I don't think it will move as slowly as C++ does these days.
kevingadd 5y ago
As someone who's literally never written a single line of Rust and has shipped lots of C and C++, this is a nonsense argument. So what if C++'s model has "worked" for 36 years? It survives through momentum, it really doesn't matter how well the model works because it's hard to replace. Same with C. There are virtues to both languages and their standards processes, but big players wouldn't be pushing towards adopting Rust if the C and C++ models actually were up to the needs and standards of software in 2021. C++'s standards process and pace haven't stopped the stdlib from being filled with bad implementations of primitives that people have to replace with libraries like Boost or custom per-vendor implementations - why do you think so many companies (game studios, facebook, etc) ship their own versions of the C++ STL, or prohibit the use of the STL entirely? Why do so many libraries ship with a C++ wrapper over a C public interface instead of the opposite? Why do binary-only libraries written in C++ so often ship with unique builds for various compilers instead of a single binary like a C library? The main answer to all of these questions is that C++ is deficient by design in all sorts of ways - underspecified ABI, low-quality stdlib specs, bad encapsulation, bad performance characteristics, etc.
- oscardssmith 5y ago
  I think a lot of it is that modern languages (python to some extent, rust Julia etc) implimented many more of their features themselves. Julia, for example, has some basic stuff defined in C, but 70% of the code is just Julia. Since most of the changes between releases are in the language, they don't introduce new syntax or make the language feel messier. They just slightly expand what the language can do easily.
renewiltord 5y ago
Yeah, and in 30 years I won't use either because I am a fickle man and do not marry my programming languages. I will be using Bouillabaisse - the fastest moving language this side of the Seine. I'm sure someone on Hacker News will tell me that Bouillabaisse won't be as fast moving 30 years from then but at that point I'll be using Caracole - the fastest moving language this side of the Kuiper Belt.

nickysielicki 5y ago

Scarecrow. I’m far from emotionally invested in rust and I’ve dealt with the downvote army of zealots who want to rewrite everything in rust. I’m not the evangelist you think I am. C++ is just losing here.

titanomachy 5y ago
Is “scarecrow” the same thing as “strawman”?
- nickysielicki 5y ago
  A scarecrow is a straw-man. :)
- elondaits 5y ago
  Strawman is less offensive.
  - nickysielicki 5y ago
    Wait, “scarecrow” is offensive now? How?
    - bregma 5y ago
      If it only had a brain?
throwaway894345 5y ago
Agreed (and I'm dealing with an army of Rust zealots right now on proggit). Rust has a track record of carefully considered features and a process that allows it to continue making changes to the language while managing compatibility. I do expect Rust will slow down and bureaucracy will slip in in the next 30 years (because I fully believe Rust will become very popular and many big companies will come to depend on it for security and critical real time systems), but I don't think it will move as slowly as C++ does these days.

kevingadd 5y ago

As someone who's literally never written a single line of Rust and has shipped lots of C and C++, this is a nonsense argument. So what if C++'s model has "worked" for 36 years? It survives through momentum, it really doesn't matter how well the model works because it's hard to replace. Same with C. There are virtues to both languages and their standards processes, but big players wouldn't be pushing towards adopting Rust if the C and C++ models actually were up to the needs and standards of software in 2021. C++'s standards process and pace haven't stopped the stdlib from being filled with bad implementations of primitives that people have to replace with libraries like Boost or custom per-vendor implementations - why do you think so many companies (game studios, facebook, etc) ship their own versions of the C++ STL, or prohibit the use of the STL entirely? Why do so many libraries ship with a C++ wrapper over a C public interface instead of the opposite? Why do binary-only libraries written in C++ so often ship with unique builds for various compilers instead of a single binary like a C library? The main answer to all of these questions is that C++ is deficient by design in all sorts of ways - underspecified ABI, low-quality stdlib specs, bad encapsulation, bad performance characteristics, etc.

oscardssmith 5y ago
I think a lot of it is that modern languages (python to some extent, rust Julia etc) implimented many more of their features themselves. Julia, for example, has some basic stuff defined in C, but 70% of the code is just Julia. Since most of the changes between releases are in the language, they don't introduce new syntax or make the language feel messier. They just slightly expand what the language can do easily.

renewiltord 5y ago

Yeah, and in 30 years I won't use either because I am a fickle man and do not marry my programming languages. I will be using Bouillabaisse - the fastest moving language this side of the Seine. I'm sure someone on Hacker News will tell me that Bouillabaisse won't be as fast moving 30 years from then but at that point I'll be using Caracole - the fastest moving language this side of the Kuiper Belt.