3 ms·

I am glad that you have changed your mind. Not because I am a Rust advocate (haven't worked with the language in at least a year now, what advocate would that m

I am glad that you have changed your mind. Not because I am a Rust advocate (haven't worked with the language in at least a year now, what advocate would that make me?) but because this: > I was extremely skeptical of Rust, due to the hype and some very obnoxious Rust proponents. ...is obviously a very biased way of gauging anything. As mentioned upthread in another comment of mine, every single community has the minority of loud bad apples and it's not fair to judge Rust because its community is literally like any other on this planet. You did the right thing, you ignored the emotional responses and went to check for yourself, factually and objectively. I'd be honored to call you my colleague. Bravo.

lionkor 2y ago
It wasn't easy, and I was quite toxic towards Rust posts before that - simply because everything at the time was saturated with Rust news, and a lot of very silly "rewrite it in Rust" posts. There are only three things that annoyed me this much in the last 10 years: Crypto (which was largely a hype-bubble), Rust (which turned out to be very cool), and AI (we'll see where that goes). > You did the right thing, you ignored the emotional responses and went to check for yourself, factually and objectively. I'm currently talking to lots of other C and C++ developers I know, and trying to convince them to give it an honest shot. The first thing I say is pretty much "Hey, I know this thing is overhyped and you're probably fed up, I thought so, too, but ...", and then follow that up with tagged unions, pattern matching and showing the toolchain. That sells most of them on it. Error handling also is a huge plus if they're also big error-handling nerds. Also note how I never mention memory safety -- the reality is barely anyone gets really excited about that. We'd all use @safe Dlang[0] if it was that exciting to us all. [0]: https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html
- pdimitar 2y ago
  > Also note how I never mention memory safety -- the reality is barely anyone gets really excited about that. We'd all use @safe Dlang[0] if it was that exciting to us all. That's a different approach, thanks for describing it. I've tried it as well but apparently I spoke with some very bone-headed people because they hand-waved it away immediately with "meh, C unions are fine, you're a noob if you need Rust to hold your hand". :( I'll remember to bring those up next time, because I found myself caring about exhaustive pattern matching / enums more lately, compared to memory safety (which I do care about a lot still).
  - lionkor 2y ago
    C unions dont work in C++ in most cases, because you can only have trivially constructible members in a union. So literally everything except primitives is out. "std::variant and the 12 ways to implement the visitor pattern" sounds like a book title, but is actually just the reality of writing C++

lionkor 2y ago

It wasn't easy, and I was quite toxic towards Rust posts before that - simply because everything at the time was saturated with Rust news, and a lot of very silly "rewrite it in Rust" posts. There are only three things that annoyed me this much in the last 10 years: Crypto (which was largely a hype-bubble), Rust (which turned out to be very cool), and AI (we'll see where that goes). > You did the right thing, you ignored the emotional responses and went to check for yourself, factually and objectively. I'm currently talking to lots of other C and C++ developers I know, and trying to convince them to give it an honest shot. The first thing I say is pretty much "Hey, I know this thing is overhyped and you're probably fed up, I thought so, too, but ...", and then follow that up with tagged unions, pattern matching and showing the toolchain. That sells most of them on it. Error handling also is a huge plus if they're also big error-handling nerds. Also note how I never mention memory safety -- the reality is barely anyone gets really excited about that. We'd all use @safe Dlang[0] if it was that exciting to us all. [0]: https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html

pdimitar 2y ago
> Also note how I never mention memory safety -- the reality is barely anyone gets really excited about that. We'd all use @safe Dlang[0] if it was that exciting to us all. That's a different approach, thanks for describing it. I've tried it as well but apparently I spoke with some very bone-headed people because they hand-waved it away immediately with "meh, C unions are fine, you're a noob if you need Rust to hold your hand". :( I'll remember to bring those up next time, because I found myself caring about exhaustive pattern matching / enums more lately, compared to memory safety (which I do care about a lot still).
- lionkor 2y ago
  C unions dont work in C++ in most cases, because you can only have trivially constructible members in a union. So literally everything except primitives is out. "std::variant and the 12 ways to implement the visitor pattern" sounds like a book title, but is actually just the reality of writing C++