4 ms·
I believe you are mixing 'complex' and 'complicated'. > productive which are reducible to a very small core That's like saying first-class continuations are e
by qsort 5y ago
I believe you are mixing 'complex' and 'complicated'.
> productive which are reducible to a very small core
That's like saying first-class continuations are easier than coroutines or generators because they effectively subsume both. I don't think that's the case at all: you now need to understand continuations in addition to coroutines and generators.
> Rust is a much simpler language than C++
C++ is more complicated than Rust, but Rust is more complex than C++. If you don't understand RAII, lifetime annotations are going to be tough to figure out...
- zetalyrae 5y agoI think if both languages were fully formalized Rust would have a smaller formalization. I don't know if Rust's grammar is context-free but it's much closer than C++'s grammar.
- masklinn 5y agoThe grammar is not a big issue. The assertion it trivially true through how much C++ features interact with one an other, badly. Just understanding the generation of special methods depending on which you implement by hand is an 8x6 matrix, and that tells you nothing about how they misbehave when you fail to follow the “Rules of Whatever” (variously 0, 3, 5, 6) properly.
- steveklabnik 5y ago(Rust's grammar has one teeny tiny corner that's context sensitive, and so that makes the entire thing context sensitive in a formal sense, but in practice, it is much simpler than that in the vast, vast majority of cases.)