3 ms·

This is not a good anecdote - You hit a 10 year old bug because your sysadmin was too lazy to update gcc and then formed a bad impression of the software? Gues

This is not a good anecdote - You hit a 10 year old bug because your sysadmin was too lazy to update gcc and then formed a bad impression of the software? Guess what, if you install a 10 year old version rust none of your code would not compile at all. Your logic is so flawed its hard to believe you are being serious. If anything it's impressive that a 10 year old C compiler worked most of the time when most other languages are not stable on these timescales.

duckerude 4y ago
The oldest rustc version I target (for a tiny project, admittedly) is over 6 years old, and it's fine. When code works it also works on the latest release. When code doesn't work I get a reasonable compile-time error message, not a mysterious segfault at runtime. It's not easy, even in a few hundred lines I had to remove many conveniences to go that far back, but it's very legible. The compiler has my back, I'm never confused about whose fault it is. Rust is young, but I don't expect this to be any different in 2030.
avgcorrection 4y ago
> Guess what, if you install a 10 year old version rust none of your code would not compile at all. Rust was not stable in 2012 yet. I do agree with your overall point though.