3 ms·
“My perception of the second sort of C programmer is that if they've moved to any more recent mainstream language, it's probably Rust.” If you are the first ty
by up2isomorphism 4y ago
“My perception of the second sort of C programmer is that if they've moved to any more recent mainstream language, it's probably Rust.”
If you are the first type, you likely get the second type’s taste wrong. Rust is very very different from C both in terms of syntax and philosophy.
- pornel 4y agoRust is from a different language family, but I think it still fits a taste of "low-level control, not OOP, not C++". I know many people see "complex with angle brackets" and equate Rust more with C++, but I disagree and think it's still closer to C — I can convert C libraries 1:1 to Rust, but C++ libraries hit an impedance mismatch and are really hard to rustify.
- pjmlp 4y agoThe use of macros and compiler plugins is pretty much closer to C++.
- scoutt 4y ago> "low-level control, not OOP, not C++". Things have a drop-scope. There are hidden initializations. Boxing is required for many things including dynamic dispatch in error handling. The tendency to use FP-like one-liners. All that mixed with funny syntax that hurts C developers eyes. A lot of "no-go" in C land (at least for me), that makes really hard to learn and to move definitely into Rust (again, at least for me)
- Gibbon1 4y agoI feel like another division is there are programmers who love mathy languages and syntax and those that hate mathy languages and syntax. The former looks down on the latter with contempt. And the latter thinks the former is annoying.