4 ms·

>"C/C++ are in a category of their own." If one wants to know it all then yes. C++ is huge language. In practice except few people nobody really needs to. Subs

• imron 4y ago
  > With Rust one must first train brain to wrap around those ownership rules and this might not be easy. You need to do that in c++ also, otherwise you'll still have the same problem - only randomly at runtime instead of at compile time.
• charcircuit 4y ago
  >With Rust one must first train brain to wrap around those ownership rules and this might not be easy. C++ users already understand ownership because C++ has ownership too. With C++ you have to me extra careful because the compiler won't save you from making mistakes like Rust will.
  • FpUser 4y ago
    I meant ownership as implemented in Rust. I am perfectly fine with ownership models of C++ and some other languages.
    • charcircuit 4y ago
      >I meant ownership as implemented in Rust. It's the same thing in Rust and C++. There is no difference conceptually.
      • hn_go_brrrrr 4y ago
        Disagree, unless we're including Rust's unsafe. Excluding that, you need to understand what the Rust compiler is able to prove is safe. In C++, you "just" need to prove to yourself that it's safe. It's a very different experience writing code.
        • Yoric 4y ago
          So perhaps "ownership rules" is the wrong vocable for this. Maybe "ownership proofs"?
        • charcircuit 4y ago
          In Rust you need to understand borrowing to write programs that compile. In C++ you need to understand borrowing to avoid writing programs that use undefined behaviour. Yes, it's a different experience, but both have the same concept of borrowing that you must understand.