4 ms·
It’s not so much that you’ve made any mistakes or omissions as much as all of these things do different, similar things, but don’t do the exact same thing. For
by steveklabnik 1y ago
It’s not so much that you’ve made any mistakes or omissions as much as all of these things do different, similar things, but don’t do the exact same thing.
For example, an array and a tuple are both aggregate types, but arrays store multiple value of a single type, and tuples store multiple values of the same type.
Some of these do boil down to “named or anonymous” but that’s also two different things.
- xscott 1y agoMore power to you for defending or explaining Rust, but the context of the conversation is comparing multiple "record" types in C# as "bad" to the "one way" in Rust. It's hard to argue that Rust has a simpler story than C#. There are a lot of almost orthogonal features one might choose for a record type: Accessor: rec.x, rec.0, rec[0], match Constant vs Mutable Reference vs Value Nominal vs Structural/Anonymous typing Subtyping for inheritance Subtyping for sum/union types And more depending on the language (ownership in Rust) > tuples store multiple values of the same type. I'm sure this was a typo. :-)
- steveklabnik 1y agoIt was a typo, thanks :) I’m not trying to pass judgement on C#. I just don’t see a lot of these things as being that similar to each other.