2 ms·
> but there is a bit of a contradiction between "here is a huge learning curve to Rust, one that I am still climbing," in the comment above and "is just easier
by littlestymaar 2y ago
> but there is a bit of a contradiction between "here is a huge learning curve to Rust, one that I am still climbing," in the comment above and "is just easier and faster than in C
I see no contradiction when you realize that no one has ever been proficient enough in C to write code that is free from UB… The problem with C is that cannot realistically be written by humans, so pretty much any language (except C++ …) is going to be “easier than C”.
- segfaltnh 2y agoWild claims. So many huge projects have been successfully written in C by humans. There are patterns to solve all the built in solutions provided by Rust, how do you imagine Rust got them in the first place? One tiny example of many here is the Linux kernel.
- pdimitar 2y agoI'd say we didn't have many options back then except for C and no more than 4-5 others. So we did the things you quoted _despite_ C's drawbacks, not because of them. I can very easily imagine doing the same things with Rust, with small amount of exceptions (that the core team is working on even now). And yes Rust learned from the mistakes of the languages before it. Is that a bad thing?