4 ms·
> If we compare it to C++, it’s obviously the better language. It really depends on what is meant by "better." The thing I like about C++ is its problems are w
by taylodl 2y ago
> If we compare it to C++, it’s obviously the better language.
It really depends on what is meant by "better." The thing I like about C++ is its problems are well-known as is how to work around them. The thing that concerns me about Rust is we don't know all its problems - in practice. We will eventually, sure.
Sometimes I don't think we pay enough attention to how much our collective experience with a language matters.
- stouset 2y agoWe’re aware of C++’s problems but working around many of them is still a widely open problem (until we discover / invent perfect humans).
- taylodl 2y agoIt's not the case that we don't have work arounds, we simply don't have generally accepted and agreed-upon work arounds. You have options. For example, there's no generally accepted work around in C++ for manual memory management. You can develop your own strategy, but you may not be able to use libraries out of the box without having to create shims (or monads) but the point is: we know how to do these things. Most of the code in production has done these things and few people are interested in refactoring this huge investment to Rust.