3 ms·
It's not just that defaults matter, the problem here is why have footgun as the default? In a runtime example I can run it with tests and it would behave fine
by Ygg2 3y ago
It's not just that defaults matter, the problem here is why have footgun as the default?
In a runtime example I can run it with tests and it would behave fine if both values are same or first arg is bigger, in Rust's case it would behave valid for ANY combination of arguments.
- pjmlp 3y agoLikewise with C++ if the safety belt is buckled.
- Ygg2 3y agoHeavy disagree. This is less giving a safety belt and more like saying we got airbags (that are deadly without seatbelts) and a DIY seat belt is somewhere in there too (it's in a box under the seat). Coming from Java the C++ stuff is jarringly unsafe.
- pjmlp 3y agoAgree that Java is much better than using raw C++. Still, if you want to contribute to OpenJDK internals, they will only be taking pull requests in C++, not Rust. So better learn how to build those seatbelts and airbags, for all the projects we rely on, including Rust's own reference implementation, that aren't going to rewrite their code from C++ into something else.