3 ms·
> C++, which is what Rust seemingly is designed to replace. It doesn't, as far as I can tell. You can't replace C++: 1. Well-functioning, mission-critical sys
by sshine 4y ago
> C++, which is what Rust seemingly is designed to replace. It doesn't, as far as I can tell.
You can't replace C++:
1. Well-functioning, mission-critical systems that were made in C++ aren't being replaced.
2. Anything GPU and ML-related is still better solved in Python/C++.
3. Anything that depends on scalable, high-performance data structures, C++ still has a better selection.
What "replace C++" can mean is: There are use-cases where Rust and C++ overlap where the Rust story is maturing, and you can pick Rust in those cases instead of C++ if you're not already invested in C++. But either if you have existing C++ code that works well, or you have deep C++ knowledge, or you are in one of the categories where Rust is not on par yet, there's still no competition.
- jenadine 4y ago> 1. Well-functioning, mission-critical systems that were made in C++ aren't being replaced. Very true. There is a lot of existing working code that is not going away and will even still need to be maintained for decades. > 2. Anything GPU and ML-related is still better solved in Python/C++. Can be done in Python/Rust > 3. Anything that depends on scalable, high-performance data structures, C++ still has a better selection. Why is that? Rust has equally high performance data structures. Even more perfortant in some cases (restrict by default, destructive move, easier concurrency)
- sshine 4y ago> [Anything GPU and ML-related] Can be done in Python/Rust Can be done in Brainfuck. You just need to write the Cuda bindings. > > C++ still has a better selection. > Why is that? Because C++ was around for longer. For people who are more invested in Rust (myself included), extending Rust's selection is seen as a great endeavour. I personally keep a list of things I wish to "oxidize". :-)