5 ms·

> I'm convinced no more than a handful of humans understand all of C# or C++ How would the proportion of humans that understand all of Rust compare?

by kermatt 11mo ago

metaltyphoon 11mo ago
Rust isn’t that complicated if you have some background in non GC languages.
- j16sdiz 11mo ago
  Parent say _all_ of it, not a subset for everyday use.
  - estebank 11mo ago
    There's a different question too, that I think is more important (for any language): how much of the language do you need to know in order to use it effectively. As another poster mentioned, the issue with C++ might not be the breath of features, but rather how they interact in non-obvious ways.
Measter 11mo ago
For Rust vs C++, I'd say it'll be much easier to have a complete understanding of Rust. C++ is an immensely complex language, with a lot of feature interactions. C# is actually fairly complex. I'm not sure if it's quite at the same level as Rust, but I wouldn't say it's that far behind in difficulty for complete understanding.
Santosh83 11mo ago
For Rust I'd expect the implementation to be the real beast, versus the language itself. But not sure how it compares to C++ implementation complexity.
pclmulqdq 11mo ago
I'm pretty convinced that nobody has a full picture of Rust in their head. There isn't even a spec to read.
- jrpelkonen 11mo ago
  There is, in fact, a spec to read[1], as of earlier this year. [1] https://rustfoundation.org/media/ferrous-systems-donates-ferrocene-language-specification-to-rust-project/ https://rustfoundation.org/media/ferrous-systems-donates-fer...
kccqzy 11mo ago
Rust is very advanced, with things like higher-ranked trait bounds (https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/hrtb.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/hrtb.html) and generic associated types (https://www.ncameron.org/rfcs/1598 https://www.ncameron.org/rfcs/1598) that are difficult because they are essential complexity not accidental complexity.
gf000 11mo ago
Rust managed to learn a lot from C++ and other languages' mistakes. So while it has quite a bit of essential complexity (inherent in the design space it operates: zero overhead low-level language with memory safety), I believe it fares overall better. Like no matter the design, a language wouldn't need 10 different kinds of initializer syntaxes, yet C++ has at least that many.

> I'm convinced no more than a handful of humans understand all of C# or C++ How would the proportion of humans that understand all of Rust compare?

by kermatt 11mo ago

> I'm convinced no more than a handful of humans understand all of C# or C++ How would the proportion of humans that understand all of Rust compare?

metaltyphoon 11mo ago

Rust isn’t that complicated if you have some background in non GC languages.

j16sdiz 11mo ago
Parent say _all_ of it, not a subset for everyday use.
- estebank 11mo ago
  There's a different question too, that I think is more important (for any language): how much of the language do you need to know in order to use it effectively. As another poster mentioned, the issue with C++ might not be the breath of features, but rather how they interact in non-obvious ways.

Measter 11mo ago

For Rust vs C++, I'd say it'll be much easier to have a complete understanding of Rust. C++ is an immensely complex language, with a lot of feature interactions. C# is actually fairly complex. I'm not sure if it's quite at the same level as Rust, but I wouldn't say it's that far behind in difficulty for complete understanding.

Santosh83 11mo ago

For Rust I'd expect the implementation to be the real beast, versus the language itself. But not sure how it compares to C++ implementation complexity.

pclmulqdq 11mo ago

I'm pretty convinced that nobody has a full picture of Rust in their head. There isn't even a spec to read.

jrpelkonen 11mo ago
There is, in fact, a spec to read[1], as of earlier this year. [1] https://rustfoundation.org/media/ferrous-systems-donates-ferrocene-language-specification-to-rust-project/ https://rustfoundation.org/media/ferrous-systems-donates-fer...

kccqzy 11mo ago

Rust is very advanced, with things like higher-ranked trait bounds (https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/hrtb.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/hrtb.html) and generic associated types (https://www.ncameron.org/rfcs/1598 https://www.ncameron.org/rfcs/1598) that are difficult because they are essential complexity not accidental complexity.

gf000 11mo ago

Rust managed to learn a lot from C++ and other languages' mistakes. So while it has quite a bit of essential complexity (inherent in the design space it operates: zero overhead low-level language with memory safety), I believe it fares overall better. Like no matter the design, a language wouldn't need 10 different kinds of initializer syntaxes, yet C++ has at least that many.