3 ms·
At the language level, Rust is substantially more similar to C++ than it is to Go. C++ and Rust both have many properties (lack of GC, pervasive stack allocati
by Jweb_Guru 12y ago
At the language level, Rust is substantially more similar to C++ than it is to Go. C++ and Rust both have many properties (lack of GC, pervasive stack allocation [even for closures], move semantics, overhead-free C FFI compatibility) that many other languages lack, and the Rust developers actively work to match C++ on features. None of this is true for Go; Rust's similarities with Go are shared by many other languages as well, many of which are much more widely used than either (hence would probably represent a more informative comparison; e.g. I think posts contrasting Rust and Java would be quite useful, but I have seen very few of them). As such, Go and Rust comparisons tend not to be very illuminating.
- pcwalton 12y ago> At the language level, Rust is substantially more similar to C++ than it is to Go. C++ and Rust both have many properties (lack of GC, pervasive stack allocation [even for closures], move semantics, overhead-free C FFI compatibility) that many other languages lack, and the Rust developers actively work to match C++ on features. I think this is absolutely true, for what it's worth.
- ademarre 12y agoRust and Java? Not the usefulness you're looking for, but this tool popped up on HN today: http://rosetta.alhur.es/compare/Rust/Java/# http://rosetta.alhur.es/compare/Rust/Java/#
- steveklabnik 12y agoThe Rust on Rosetta code is exceedingly old. There's a community project to update the examples, but they're waiting until 1.0 to move upstream, so as not to cause them too much churn.