4 ms·
It seems like your first paragraph answers the question in the second. If it is harder to use and learn then that reduces the value of free software released us
by eikenberry 1y ago
It seems like your first paragraph answers the question in the second. If it is harder to use and learn then that reduces the value of free software released using it as that software is then harder to modify, fix, contribute to, etc. The tradeoff for Rust being hard should be more security and fewer bugs. The additional cost here, and the one that the OP is probably annoyed with, is that it moves away from the languages/platforms that MS has traditionally used and that developers who work on that platform expect.
- koakuma-chan 1y agoIs Rust harder than C++?
- npalli 1y agoYes.
- Guekka 1y agoThat answer lacks some nuance Yes, it is harder to get a Rust program to compile. But it also is easier to accomplish the desired task safely
- eikenberry 1y agoIf the OP already knows C++ then it would obviously be harder for them. Given the nature of their post, this was my interpretation.
- haiku2077 1y agoIt's harder to do simple things and easier to do complicated things.
- amenhotep 1y agoNo.