4 ms·
Rust acolytes need to come to terms with the fact that if they want Rust to be the next C++, it's going to be the next C++. Heck, even C++ async is simpler. A
by binary132 3y ago
Rust acolytes need to come to terms with the fact that if they want Rust to be the next C++, it's going to be the next C++. Heck, even C++ async is simpler. Anyway, who needs a package manager when you've got a package manager?
- falcor84 3y ago>who needs a package manager when you've got a package manager That flew over my head; could you explain?
- foota 3y agoI think the idea is that being the next C++ means being just as hard to write as C++, and then saying "why do we need the next C++ when we already have C++?", but I'm curious if my interpretation is right :)
- binary132 3y agoYes, the first part is what I was going for. Actually it is even worse than that, because C++ has a more limited syntax. Rust's syntax and semantics must support more features. This fundamentally limits its accessibility.
- binary132 3y agoLots of languages have tools which reimplement package management specifically for their libraries, and this pattern has become fairly "normal", but the traditional norm is to access and provide libraries as system packages via the system's package manager. With that in mind, things like Cargo become less magical and more redundant with other tools like Make.