Microsoft is creating a new Rust-based programming language for secure coding

Post by cyphar » Wed, Dec 04, 2019, 2:30 AM UTC

meddlepal wrote: post #124

bpfrh wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is exactly the point. The argument is that if a language is developed/mainly contributed by a single company there is an inherent risk of that language being suddenly discountinued or lacking features that are needed by other people/companies. At least that's how I understand the critics against microsoft in this case.

> lacking features that are needed by other people/companies. Funny how nobody seems to give pile on Google for how it handles Go here...

Post by hu3 » Wed, Dec 04, 2019, 8:40 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #192

hu3 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Orthogonal concepts. Modern languages can be bloated.

Or stuck in the pre-history of language design. If Go's design was perfect, its eco-system wouldn't feel like Java 1.0, full with libraries to replicate what should be language features to start with. The first time I saw "go generate" it was on Borland C++ 2.0 for MS-DOS, released around 1990.

Post by hu3 » Wed, Dec 04, 2019, 9:08 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #194

hu3 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't lie. It's entertaining to watch people like you get emotional over a piece of technology.

Not really, passional about language design and safety, indeed. Some of us care about advancing the state of art, instead of being stuck into the ways of the past.

Post by danielscrubs » Wed, Dec 04, 2019, 1:23 PM UTC

hu3 wrote: post #108

Animats wrote: post #43

I'm curious to see what Microsoft does. The big breakthrough with Rust was ownership, and Microsoft seems to agree on that. Rust has a lot of other baggage that could be dispensed with. Of course, Microsoft has their own baggage.

More precisely Cyclone already had borrow checker over a decade ago. Rust derives much of its memory model from that language.

Post by Ingirded » Wed, Dec 04, 2019, 1:52 PM UTC

KenoFischer wrote: post #177

Recurecur wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I think Julia is a perfect starting point for an extremely productive general purpose language. The one major wart with Julia is reliance on GC, I'm interested to hear what workarounds exist. If no common usage patterns rely on the GC, it should be possible to write "recycling" code that doesn't incur GC pauses and hence, unpredictable latency. I really enjoy using Julia, it's a great balance of concision, e…

There is a common demand from people for extracting just a very concrete computation from a julia codebase and compiling it to a standalone library (or even just using it within an existing julia program, but guaranteeing certain allocation or real time behavior). For example, julia includes a pure julia implementation of libm, but we also maintain the openlibm C library, since we link it into some of our C dependenc…