3 ms·

Rust. Some of it's design goals (as stated on their webpage) are among the exact things you mentioned: zero-cost abstractions, minimal runtime, guaranteed memor

• threeseed 12y ago
  Rust isn't even at version 1.0 yet and is probably a year away from being in a "suitable for production" state. System time is far, far too critical to take chances with.
  • vertex-four 12y ago
    On the other hand, this program is going to take a year or so before anybody seriously considers using it, simply due to the fact that few people are going to do something other than their distro default for such a small part of their system.
    • lttlrck 12y ago
      waiting for rust to hit production readiness will not avoid that.
      • vertex-four 12y ago
        The point is simply that if one started a project now with the idea that it would probably only be a serious competitor in a year, Rust will most likely be ready by then - it doesn't really matter if Rust's ready right now if your project's not going to be used by anybody right now.
• nwmcsween 12y ago
  Zero-cost to whom? The developer? no as now the implementation details have to be known, the machine? no as time will be spent in the compiler churning away removing junk or if the compiler isn't smart enough including it. Also the C++ / rust definition of zero-cost is only if you don't use the abstraction. Minimal runtime is relative.