Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
1–10 of 75 posts
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#2Previous coverage of rust:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1498528 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1498233
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#3> Ed Borasky recently commented here at ReadWriteHack: "We flat out don't need any more programming languages! What we need is efficient implementations of the ones we have now and IDEs / version control systems that enforce software engineering discipline."
There was no need for assembly -- writing straight machine code worked. There was no need for C -- writing straight assembly worked. Etc, etc.
There has never been a need for a new programming language, but new programming languages can make life easier, can save you time, can make new optimizations possible, etc. So he's right in that we flat out don't need any more programming languages, but that doesn't mean creating new programming languages is a bad idea, or something we shouldn't do.
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#4A new "systems" language? Really? What about an IL to replace Javascript as the lingua franca, rather than doing this?
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#5I tend to judge languages solely on their aesthetic utility unless they're designed to make something very difficult possible (e.g. Erlang). And this one isn't any more pleasant to read than Java or C, it just happens to be a little different. Given the long list of advantages to using Rust, why they can't use an existing syntax?
Also, I've always felt queasy about using -> or => as arrows. And the word 'let' instead of 'def' or 'var' gives me a strange flashback to middle school which I can't quite pin down.
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#6> Ed Borasky recently commented here at ReadWriteHack: "We flat out don't need any more programming languages! What we need is efficient implementations of the ones we have now and IDEs / version control systems that enforce software engineering discipline." There was no need for assembly -- writing straight machine code worked. There was no need for C -- writing straight assembly worked. Etc, etc. There has never be…
It might be too soon to ask, but what distinguishes Rust from Google's Go or the D programming language? It seems to me that we've got three programming languages competing for the same niche.
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#7> Ed Borasky recently commented here at ReadWriteHack: "We flat out don't need any more programming languages! What we need is efficient implementations of the ones we have now and IDEs / version control systems that enforce software engineering discipline." There was no need for assembly -- writing straight machine code worked. There was no need for C -- writing straight assembly worked. Etc, etc. There has never be…
It might be too soon to ask, but what distinguishes Rust from Google's Go or the D programming language? It seems to me that we've got three programming languages competing for the same niche.
Not a whole lot, conceptually, it seems. The syntax feels very Nemerle-like to me, though, which is nice. Definitely something to play around with, if nothing else.
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might be too soon to ask, but what distinguishes Rust from Google's Go or the D programming language? It seems to me that we've got three programming languages competing for the same niche.
Not a whole lot, conceptually, it seems. The syntax feels very Nemerle-like to me, though, which is nice. Definitely something to play around with, if nothing else.
Having seen early versions of Rust (I work at Mozilla) I can tell you that the syntax is the last thing they're even considering (though that may have changed over the past few months). Seems like Graydon wants to get the guts right first.
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#9Scheme/Lisp compilers already allocate variables on the stack when it's safe to do so. It isn't always safe to do so. The part about "lambda-blocks w/o heap allocation" describes a missing feature, not an innovation in concurrency or efficiency.
Re: Mozilla Is Designing a New Programming Language Language Called Rust
#10> Ed Borasky recently commented here at ReadWriteHack: "We flat out don't need any more programming languages! What we need is efficient implementations of the ones we have now and IDEs / version control systems that enforce software engineering discipline." There was no need for assembly -- writing straight machine code worked. There was no need for C -- writing straight assembly worked. Etc, etc. There has never be…
It might be too soon to ask, but what distinguishes Rust from Google's Go or the D programming language? It seems to me that we've got three programming languages competing for the same niche.
Not entirely sure what distinguishes them, but I'd rather have some competition in the niche than avoid defaulting to the first language that addresses the niche.