4 ms·
>it also has many aspects I find problematic Could you share those? Not trying to argue, just curious on the perspective of a C veteran, as someone who’s just
by torben-friis 11mo ago
>it also has many aspects I find problematic
Could you share those?
Not trying to argue, just curious on the perspective of a C veteran, as someone who’s just starting with lower level languages.
- uecker 11mo agoMostly the advantages a listed for C: stability, portability, simplicity, fast compilation times could all in reverse also be considered disadvantages of Rust. I am also not a fan of monomorphization, not of static linking, and not of having many dependencies out of a large uncurated pile of many projects. I also think Rust is not pragmatic enough. Overall though, my main issue is complexity of the language which I think goes in the wrong direction - this may be ok if the alternative is C++, but if you prefer C to C++ then Rust is equally unappealing. At the same time I think the advantages of Rust are exaggerated. I still agree memory safety is important, I just think Rust is not an ideal approach.
- ahartmetz 11mo agoC strings (it's almost an exaggeration to say that C has strings) and "just never make any mistakes bro" based memory management come to mind.
- uecker 11mo agoWe were talking about Rust issues. But yes, C should have a proper string type. But as long as it does not have a better standardized string type, it is possible to define your own (or use a library).
- ahartmetz 11mo agoAbsolutely. Even when I preferred C over C++ (a long time ago), it was "but with a string library".
- drnick1 11mo agoWith LLMs becoming so good at coding, "just never make any mistake" is also becoming easier. I usually write my own code because I don't like the coding style of LLMs, but on more than one occasion now they have proven very useful as code reviewers and bug hunters.