3 ms·
I would tend to disagree; fundamental to Rust is the concept of zero-cost abstraction. Swift does not do that. I my view, and I might be wrong, many features o
by jdalsgaard 8mo ago
I would tend to disagree; fundamental to Rust is the concept of zero-cost abstraction. Swift does not do that.
I my view, and I might be wrong, many features of Rust are chosen specifically to have the language comply to the zero-cost rule. Such as the ownership model.
- isodev 8mo agoThe explicit ownership model in Rust also protects one from the footguns of actors and Tasks in Swift. Rust also makes most mistakes in that area a build time error which is not only a huge time saver but also helps one learn and improve in these areas.
- behnamoh 8mo agoSwift also supports the ownership model.
- kibwen 8mo agoDefaults matter. Owned types are the default in Rust and opt-in in Swift. As a consequence, by default it's safe to assume that any Swift code you fine in the wild isn't making use of owned types.
- jdalsgaard 8mo agoYes, it supports it. But is fundamentally not based on the idea of zero-cost abstraction from where I see a lot of Rust features being derived from. So crates I pull in must obey it too - it's not optional (you do have unsafe to watch out for, but that's an easy grep).