3 ms·
Rust needed 25 years to bring us a significally improved abstraction over C++ without sacrificing resource usage. It just shows that it's much easier to say tha
by xiphias2 5y ago
Rust needed 25 years to bring us a significally improved abstraction over C++ without sacrificing resource usage. It just shows that it's much easier to say that we need a higher level language than to know what would work in practice well enough to be useful as a systems level programming language.
At the same time Linux was released 20 years after C, so of course Rust has to mature more to really take over C++.
- DubiousPusher 5y agoIs Rust an abstraction over ideas in C++ or is it in fact just a better set of abstractions over the same underlying operations? I would say the latter, mostly due to jettisoning OO nonsense.
- xiphias2 5y agoSure, I agree with you, I meant that Rust's type system is a better abstraction over manual memory management than C++'s type system, I didn't mean that Rust is an abstraction over C++, I'm just not that great in expressing myself clearly in this case.
- eru 5y agoIt's not just OO. It's also making things safe by default, and getting rid of a lot of accumulated jank.
- eru 5y agoNah. We had stuff that was better than C++ for a long time. (C++ has improved over time, but so have the alternatives.) A large part of C++'s staying power is due to status quo bias. So in that sense you are right, if you take 'significantly improved' to mean improved enough to overcome status quo bias.