2 ms·

> That is not entirely true, if you translate the C code to Rust, you get C code, in Rust, with similar issues (or possibly worse). thus it was basically true

by lucb1e 5y ago

> That is not entirely true, if you translate the C code to Rust, you get C code, in Rust, with similar issues (or possibly worse). thus it was basically true after all? Like, sure, Rust is turing-complete so you can simulate whatever C did and thus technically you can translate anything that C can do into Rust. But if it doesn't fix any problems, then have you really translated it into Rust?

masklinn 5y ago
> thus it was basically true after all? No? > Like, sure, Rust is turing-complete so you can simulate whatever C It's not simulating anything, and has nothing to do with turing completeness. > But if it doesn't fix any problems, then have you really translated it into Rust? Yeees? Unless your definition of "translated" has nothing to do with the word or the concept. You end up with a project full of rust code which builds using rust's toolchains. That sounds like a translation to me.