4 ms·

> The language is simpler, cleaner, safer, and more enjoyable to work with. I was a Rust v1 contributor. I have great hopes for the language as a replacement f

by krona 4y ago

> The language is simpler, cleaner, safer, and more enjoyable to work with. I was a Rust v1 contributor. I have great hopes for the language as a replacement for c in systems engineering. However, I much prefer C++ 20 for the kind of work I do (scientific computing). Rust isn't a competitor to C++ in that arena, in my humble opinion. > Programmers currently using Rust are superior to programmers using C++, statistically speaking The phrase 'statistically speaking' suggests the collection of empirical data. Could you elaborate? > People learn Rust because they love their craft. If Rust becomes popular enough, this will no longer be any truer than for people who learn c++.

auggierose 4y ago
Very interesting. I am working on something that I hope will also appeal to people doing scientific computing. Could you say a few words about why you prefer C++20 over Rust for scientific computing?
slashdev 4y ago
> I was a Rust v1 contributor. I have great hopes for the language as a replacement for c in systems engineering. However, I much prefer C++ 20 for the kind of work I do (scientific computing). Rust isn't a competitor to C++ in that arena, in my humble opinion. There's a lot of domains where Rust isn't an appropriate replacement. Notice I phrased it as "if you have the choice between Rust and C++". Often times because of libraries/frameworks you need, that may not really be a choice. > The phrase 'statistically speaking' suggests the collection of empirical data. Could you elaborate? I don't have data apart from two decades of screening candidates and conducting interviews. I've heard this from other people, including Paul Graham, and I've seen it in my personal experience. I probably should have chosen different wording to not mislead people that this is backed by hard data. > If Rust becomes popular enough, this will no longer be any truer than for people who learn c++. That's how it goes. Python was once a signal for finding better developers. That's no longer true.

by krona 4y ago

auggierose 4y ago

Very interesting. I am working on something that I hope will also appeal to people doing scientific computing. Could you say a few words about why you prefer C++20 over Rust for scientific computing?

slashdev 4y ago

> I was a Rust v1 contributor. I have great hopes for the language as a replacement for c in systems engineering. However, I much prefer C++ 20 for the kind of work I do (scientific computing). Rust isn't a competitor to C++ in that arena, in my humble opinion. There's a lot of domains where Rust isn't an appropriate replacement. Notice I phrased it as "if you have the choice between Rust and C++". Often times because of libraries/frameworks you need, that may not really be a choice. > The phrase 'statistically speaking' suggests the collection of empirical data. Could you elaborate? I don't have data apart from two decades of screening candidates and conducting interviews. I've heard this from other people, including Paul Graham, and I've seen it in my personal experience. I probably should have chosen different wording to not mislead people that this is backed by hard data. > If Rust becomes popular enough, this will no longer be any truer than for people who learn c++. That's how it goes. Python was once a signal for finding better developers. That's no longer true.