3 ms·
Not the parent, but I think in a vacuum Rust would be pretty good at filling C++'s niche (minimal performance compromise, low-level-when-needed, high-level-sort
by nyanpasu64 5y ago
Not the parent, but I think in a vacuum Rust would be pretty good at filling C++'s niche (minimal performance compromise, low-level-when-needed, high-level-sort-of, native compilation, though C interop is less seamless), plus it's more expressive/beautiful (but more troublesome if you want to mutate aliased pointers), and teaches you upfront to avoid pitfalls. But Rust has less thorough library support (though Rust does have some really cool libraries), and the existing practices around separate compilation and stable ABI can't be carried to Rust. I also dislike the culture of downloading dependencies from the Internet.
- zozbot234 5y ago> and the existing practices around separate compilation and stable ABI can't be carried to Rust They totally can, by using the C ABI. C++ ABI is not really "stable" anyway, it's been long due for a break.