What do you think about Rust? Is it ready to replace c and c++?

Asher Robinson
Asher Robinson

What do you think about Rust? Is it ready to replace c and c++?

Other urls found in this thread:

marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=151233345723889&w=2
play.rust-lang.org/?gist=11b8cb9088b0f8c36048a54ee293f537

Andrew Gonzalez
Andrew Gonzalez

What are the improvements it offers?

Jason Diaz
Jason Diaz

the CIA niggers are terrified of losing their buffer overflow exploits

Colton Walker
Colton Walker

Looks even more disgusting than C++

Matthew Brooks
Matthew Brooks

what font?

Jaxson Sullivan
Jaxson Sullivan

What do you think about Rust?
good
Is it ready to replace c and c++?
not yet

Jason Lewis
Jason Lewis

I just don't get some syntax choices. The slim and fat arrows have no real meaning and are at very specific places where colon (or nothing) could do the job. Closure syntax differs from function/method syntax which differs from return value syntax. Wonder if macros syntax could be made more readable.
I don't believe borrow checker needs to be in compiler. It can be external tool working with IR or AST for validation and keep move semantics in language syntax. Anyway I wonder if the ownership and exclusive mutability guarantees can in Rust provide the same level of optimizations as Fortran or restricted pointers in C. Would be disappointing if not.
It won't replace C because C is highly standardized language with fairly simple specifications, thus is THE language for easy porting on new platforms. Because of the massive beasts in Rust's compiler toolchain and quite moving specs this isn't the signature attribute Rust would have. C++? Not sure neither. It replaces C++ STL very well but for really competing with C++ it needs to provide the same frameworks for high performance computing, clustering, graphics and so on.

Brody Campbell
Brody Campbell

It won't replace either of them because as soon as you need speed, or lower memory usage, or interacting with the raw CPU, you have to rewrite in C/C++ and you're back to square one.

Hudson Reed
Hudson Reed

the massive beasts in Rust's compiler
Can you elaborate? Are beasts like bugs that got irradiated and mutated?

Aiden Morgan
Aiden Morgan

You don't know what you're talking about.

Juan Cruz
Juan Cruz

Implying Rust isn't faster and safer than C++ already

Daniel Robinson
Daniel Robinson

No, it's not.

marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=151233345723889&w=2

Kevin Torres
Kevin Torres

There will always be a tradeoff between speed and safety, Rust is safe instead of speed

Robert Wright
Robert Wright

Is that why Java is faster than C, brainlet?

Aiden Perez
Aiden Perez

It's not safe either. Memory errors in no less than 10 lines:
play.rust-lang.org/?gist=11b8cb9088b0f8c36048a54ee293f537

Chase Morales
Chase Morales

or interacting with the raw CPU
what is redox?

Leo Hall
Leo Hall

i'm no programmer, but rust does look pretty nice. haven't tried it. is it worth learning?

Brody Ramirez
Brody Ramirez

instead of speed
It's comparable with C++ in benchmarks though.

Adam Wood
Adam Wood

No
Learn python instead

Jayden Cooper
Jayden Cooper

It's a meme language
Every decade one language can ascend to be the most powerful, in the 70s it was C, in the 80s it was C++, in the 90s it was Java, in the 2000s it was Go, Rust missed it's change

Adam Flores
Adam Flores

Rust is safe instead of speed
Rust didn't save you from writing this sentence though.

Wyatt Davis
Wyatt Davis

70s it was C, in the 80s it was C++, in the 90s it was Java, in the 2000s it was Go, Rust missed it's change
what about the 2010s, or the upcoming 2020s?

Jeremiah Morgan
Jeremiah Morgan

i'd wait until you don't need unsafe for doubly linked lists.

Dominic Edwards
Dominic Edwards

This is true,
I've been even getting along with C++ and now happens this

Gavin Flores
Gavin Flores

Rust came out the same time as Go and never got used

Daniel Ortiz
Daniel Ortiz

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Elijah Wood
Elijah Wood

already know python, hate it despite the versatility
damn, sounded promising.

Charles Gray
Charles Gray

rustc is very big and complex
rustc's only backend is llvm
llvm is very big and complex
cargo is least portable piece in whole toolchain, even some alternative linux distros had issues making it work
RedoxOS is a nice example how hard it is to port Rust's toolchain on new platform even if targeting Rust since beginning.

Noah Anderson
Noah Anderson

Underrated post.
While Theo is indeed acting like a butthurt baby in 1/3rd of the post, he has some very good points:
- cost (time, robustness) of adding Rust to the OS build process
- platform support (e.g. i386 can't bootstrap)
These are just not use cases that Mozilla is optimizing their (and let's not pretend it'd survive without them) language for
At least for the time being, it has some significant costs. Which, to be fair, may not be an issue for other projects, but some projects can't in good conscience accept them.

Evan White
Evan White

Also OpenBSD amd64 is Tier 3 platform for Rust - without full support and crazy amount of patching to make it work. Putting this into base would be madness.

Justin Reyes
Justin Reyes

Every decade one language can ascend to be the most powerful
in the 2000s it was Go

the most powerful
Go
stay on your meds m80

Christopher Ortiz
Christopher Ortiz

It's a nice hobby project to be kept in an experimental branch off the main repo,.
Thinking they can just swing on by and try to pottering their new autism focus down the obsd community's throats won't win them a lot of friends though.

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit