3 ms·
Having multiple implementations is a sign of a healthy programming language. C++, Rust's primary competitor in this space has multiple implementations and all a
by mempko 5y ago
Having multiple implementations is a sign of a healthy programming language. C++, Rust's primary competitor in this space has multiple implementations and all are used by somebody. In fact, if rust as a language cannot deal with multiple compilers (ecosystem doesn't allow it as you described by your crates.io) then I don't see how it can overtake C++.
- southerntofu 5y ago> if rust as a language cannot deal with multiple compilers (ecosystem doesn't allow it as you described by your crates.io) Why would that not be the case? crates.io is just a code repository like any other. You don't need crates.io to write/use Rust code, and crates.io has no specific requirement for a certain compiler. It just so happens that currently only the main implementation of Rust language (rustc) can compile all of crates.io repository, but this could change in the future.
- myrrlyn 5y ago> Having multiple implementations is a sign of a healthy programming language this is frequently taken as axiomatic but there's no actual support for it in reality. there are plenty of healthy single-implementation languages (go, rust, scala, erlang) and plenty of unhealthy multi-implementation languages (c, d, sql, javascript) to go alongside the healthy/multi (python, ruby) and unhealthy/single (php, i guess, i don't care about this quadrant very much)