2 ms·
The claim was runtime cost > the competing language will have a runtime cost, which often is unacceptable. The problem you now mention > at the cost of devel
by mejutoco 1mo ago
The claim was runtime cost
> the competing language will have a runtime cost, which often is unacceptable.
The problem you now mention
> at the cost of developing time and workarounds overhead.
Also happens with plain c and the "pay attention" method.
- 6P58r3MXJSLi 1mo ago> Also happens with plain c and the "pay attention" method. not really there are decades of well known practices to basically cover every possible scenario the point is Rust doesn't allow to write certain kinds of code or use certain patterns it's the cost of the boilerplate it's not that it is hard, it's that it is tedious and if we throw LLM at the problem, well, we're not talking about 100% safety anymore
- mejutoco 1mo ago> at the cost of developing time and workarounds overhead. Let me rephrase: you are saying that tedious following of best practices (using or not certain kinds of code or use or certain patterns) does not take extra time in c, but rust (compiler) not allowing to write certain kinds of code or use certain patterns does take extra time.