2 ms·

The point of rust isn't to be simple. It's to prevent all the C++ people from whining that all the higher level languages have GC. In truth, 95% of them should

The point of rust isn't to be simple. It's to prevent all the C++ people from whining that all the higher level languages have GC. In truth, 95% of them should just be using a language with GC (i.e. C#/Go/Python), and the other 5% that claim they understand how unique_ptr works should have no problem switching to rust, because they are already running an implementation of the borrow checker by hand to verify that their code doesn't have bugs.

FpUser 5y ago
>"It's to prevent all the C++ people from whining " That's some very thoughtful and noble goal. Maybe people who use C++ (and bunch of other languages) are not the ones whining.
adwn 5y ago
For most of my projects, I would switch from Rust to a GC language in a heartbeat, provided that it 1) is as safe and as fast as Rust, or at most 1.5x slower 2) offers "fearless concurrency" and easy, safe, and efficient parallelism 3) has sum types and a good static type system 4) has great tooling and package management (see cargo) 5) has a vibrant and growing ecosystem So far, that language doesn't seem to exist. Most fail at points 1+2.
- afiori 5y ago
  The new concurrent ocaml is improving in all of them.
- sanxiyn 5y ago
  For me, Haskell is already there (maybe you find its ecosystem not vibrant enough?) and OCaml will be there with multicore OCaml.
  - adwn 5y ago
    I accept that Haskell is that language for some. As for me, I tried Haskell twice, and gave up each time: 1) reasoning about performance is just too difficult (due to lazy evaluation) 2) the community seems too focused on providing ever more abstract abstractions instead of practical solutions to actual problems 3) purity and freedom from side-effects cause a lot of friction and make many simple problems really hard; the libraries and patterns to solve that problem are too complicated for me to comprehend, so maybe I'm too dumb for Haskell (though I don't have any problems with Rust, so...)
- lucian1900 5y ago
  Swift and Kotlin are partial matches. Sadly, that’s about it.

FpUser 5y ago

>"It's to prevent all the C++ people from whining " That's some very thoughtful and noble goal. Maybe people who use C++ (and bunch of other languages) are not the ones whining.

adwn 5y ago

For most of my projects, I would switch from Rust to a GC language in a heartbeat, provided that it 1) is as safe and as fast as Rust, or at most 1.5x slower 2) offers "fearless concurrency" and easy, safe, and efficient parallelism 3) has sum types and a good static type system 4) has great tooling and package management (see cargo) 5) has a vibrant and growing ecosystem So far, that language doesn't seem to exist. Most fail at points 1+2.

afiori 5y ago
The new concurrent ocaml is improving in all of them.
sanxiyn 5y ago
For me, Haskell is already there (maybe you find its ecosystem not vibrant enough?) and OCaml will be there with multicore OCaml.
- adwn 5y ago
  I accept that Haskell is that language for some. As for me, I tried Haskell twice, and gave up each time: 1) reasoning about performance is just too difficult (due to lazy evaluation) 2) the community seems too focused on providing ever more abstract abstractions instead of practical solutions to actual problems 3) purity and freedom from side-effects cause a lot of friction and make many simple problems really hard; the libraries and patterns to solve that problem are too complicated for me to comprehend, so maybe I'm too dumb for Haskell (though I don't have any problems with Rust, so...)
lucian1900 5y ago
Swift and Kotlin are partial matches. Sadly, that’s about it.