2 ms·

Also practice, most of Rust codebases are filled with `unsafe`, for interface with system libraries. Also the argument of forcing a language onto a project bas

Also practice, most of Rust codebases are filled with `unsafe`, for interface with system libraries. Also the argument of forcing a language onto a project based on the lowest common denominator of programmers never plays out - this is how you get insanely messy Java codebases. Language choice will never solve poor programming style. >Like how string manipulation is so much simpler and easier in C compared to Rust? Hmm. Plenty of libraries for C for this.

IshKebab 1y ago
> most of Rust codebases are filled with `unsafe` That is absolutely untrue. Most Rust codebases have very few uses of `unsafe`. I have written tens of thousands of lines of Rust and used `unsafe` I think once. Maybe twice. > Language choice will never solve poor programming style. It absolutely does. Rust pushes you very strongly into the "pit of success". You can Google that term if you want to learn. > Plenty of libraries for C for this. I have yet to see a single C program in the wild use anything other than libc for string manipulation. I'm sure they exist but they are the 0.1%.