4 ms·

He beats that horse to death in the other two videos, which can be found at the link below. https://www.youtube.com/user/jblow888/videos https://www.youtube.co

• thinkpad20 12y ago
  I appreciate the response, but it'd be nicer to get a quick summary than a link to a pair of nearly two-hour videos.
  • gnuvince 12y ago
    For Rust, the short of it is that Blow finds its ideas too new and untested to dive into it. There are also some issues such as closures having a different syntax than top-level functions: he wants to be able to move functions easily between scopes.
    • bjz_ 12y ago
      > There are also some issues such as closures having a different syntax than top-level functions: he wants to be able to move functions easily between scopes. But closures have different semantics to functions, both in representation and in execution. The semantics of his language becomes even more confusing when he says that items at the top level are position independent, where as it seems that those in a function scope are, and yet they share the same syntax. There is a simple fix though. Just keep a uniform syntax for position independent items, but allow them to be declared at any scope. That is exactly what Rust does.
      • gnuvince 12y ago
        Yeah, I don't disagree, I'm just relating what he said in videos 1 and/or 2 about Rust. Personally, I'm all for having different syntax for different semantics.