3 ms·
Very insightful. I think the trademark policy is further complicated by the fact Rust™ (is that how we're supposed to do it?) only has one functionally complet
by infamouscow 4y ago
Very insightful.
I think the trademark policy is further complicated by the fact Rust™ (is that how we're supposed to do it?) only has one functionally complete implementation. This is another disaster in the making, and the community is collectively putting their head in the sand. [1][2]
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31779218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31779218
[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31435473 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31435473
- shakow 4y ago> This is another disaster in the making Frankly, I don't buy this. Many languages have a single functionally complete implementation (PHP, Perl, Nim, C#, Ocaml, Haskell, Julia) – or virtually a single one (Ruby, Go, Python) and that never proved to be a major problem to any of them.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Many languages have a single functionally complete implementation (PHP, Perl, Nim, C#, Ocaml, Haskell, Julia) – or virtually a single one (Ruby, Go, Python) and that never proved to be a major problem to any of them. For Ruby, which one are you referring to? CRuby, JRuby, or TruffleRuby?
- slondr 4y agoMy understanding is that the rust front-end for gcc is nearing functional completeness