Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
1–10 of 89 posts
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#2Regarding speed, I am not sure it really is the bee's knees.
The existence of LLVM and the likes, the fact that Javascript got a HUGE speedup in the past 5 years seems to be an indication that it is by essence a factor that can be tuned eventually. I doubt a "slow" language will ever get to be C in that regard, but I also doubt C will ever provide the kind of ease of mind that a more inherently modern and secure language like Rust offers out of the box thanks to its memory management model. And at the end of the day, in a web-centric world, the latter might well be what programmers and users alike happen to care more about.
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#3[deleted]
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#4I note that there are no arguments that C/C++ is better than Rust, except that it has been used for longer (and thus has more tools & knowhow around it).
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#5[deleted]
I've made an honest effort with C++ >= C++11. The language has improved -- lots -- but there's just no getting around the fact that:
- Most of the improvements hellaciously leverage the hideous template system, and
- Actually writing template-leveraging libraries is an exercise in pain, repetition, and insanely slow compile times.
C++ won't be a "Rust-killer" (insert any other modern low-level type parameterized systems language here) until a human being can actually read and make sense of the C++ standard library without needing to decipher repetitive, often recursive, and almost always unreadable templates.
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#6COBOL will never die, either.
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#7I note that there are no arguments that C/C++ is better than Rust, except that it has been used for longer (and thus has more tools & knowhow around it).
That C/C++ have a formal standard and have an entire tool ecosystem is a huge advantage over Rust for mission critical and safety critical areas (not that Rust would be used for SC applications).
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#8I get that this is a translation but it's very poorly written even considering that. lots of repetitive conclusion jumping in what I can only assume is an attempt to baffle the reader into uncritically accepting what appears to be a largely unsupported opinion.
the only evidence the post seems to offer is that rust is slow because it showed up 5th in a set of microbenchmarks. everything else is rhetorical garbage, frankly.
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#9I note that there are no arguments that C/C++ is better than Rust, except that it has been used for longer (and thus has more tools & knowhow around it).
That C/C++ have a formal standard and have an entire tool ecosystem is a huge advantage over Rust for mission critical and safety critical areas (not that Rust would be used for SC applications).
> "is a huge advantage over Rust for mission critical and safety critical areas"
There's no C/C++. They are entirely different languages (even if C is supposed to be a subset).
Not exactly suitable for mission critical systems. The fact that they are used for that is more due to the fact that they can interface with hardware at a fairly low level and the amount of engineers with C (and nowadays, C++) knowledge.
The 'formal' standard doesn't help you much when there's so much undefined behavior.
Tool availability is a fair point.
Re: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die
#10I note that there are no arguments that C/C++ is better than Rust, except that it has been used for longer (and thus has more tools & knowhow around it).
That C/C++ have a formal standard and have an entire tool ecosystem is a huge advantage over Rust for mission critical and safety critical areas (not that Rust would be used for SC applications).
A formal standard that has undefined behavior and is apparently difficult to implement a compiler for. It seems C++ is popular for mission critical software despite its standards.