3 ms·
Many people on HN “Rust syntax is so ugly” rustaceans “I love the Rust syntax so much I want it in Go too”
by littlestymaar 3y ago
Many people on HN “Rust syntax is so ugly”
rustaceans “I love the Rust syntax so much I want it in Go too”
- Scramblejams 3y agoThe author notes[0] that it keeps the Rust syntax to avoid having to write a parser. I have no issue with the syntax but I think the chance of uptake would be considerably improved if the syntax were as close to Go's as reasonably possible. That's because I estimate Go programmers to be a better target for this than Rust programmers, but maybe I'm wrong. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36847594 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36847594
- speed_spread 3y agoHaving a soft-Rust alternative is a recurring topic in the Rust community and is acknowledged as being of interest by core members: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/j2l9v9/revisiting_a_smaller_rust/ https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/j2l9v9/revisiting_a_s...
- Scramblejams 3y agoYeah, it'd be great to see something come of it. Been a while, though.
- pornel 3y agoThere’s no contradiction here. Rust’s syntax looks alien to people who are not familiar with it, but the syntax itself is fine. Some users also blame Rust’s syntax for being complicated when they actually struggle with Rust’s semantics, e.g. borrow checking wouldn’t be any less strict if Rust chose a less weird sigil for lifetime labels.