11–20 of 157 posts
Note that entire rust team was recently fired from Mozilla, so it is unclear how the future looks like for the language. Especially since it does not have a spec and only have single reference implementation
Note that entire rust team was recently fired from Mozilla, so it is unclear how the future looks like for the language. Especially since it does not have a spec and only have single reference implementation
If anyone wants to know more about const fns, see https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/functions.html#con... It is the Rust way of specifying a function as being _pure_. In other words the output is dependent only on the function arguments, and not on any external state. This means they can be evaluated at compile time. I suppose in the future, it could also allow better compiler optimizations.
Never worked with Rust, but I am pretty sure that having a function be pure is not enough to evaluate it at compile time.
If anyone wants to know more about const fns, see https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/functions.html#con... It is the Rust way of specifying a function as being _pure_. In other words the output is dependent only on the function arguments, and not on any external state. This means they can be evaluated at compile time. I suppose in the future, it could also allow better compiler optimizations.
Never worked with Rust, but I am pretty sure that having a function be pure is not enough to evaluate it at compile time.
I’m learning rust right now and there is a lot to like. Steady updates like this are also very motivating. The ecosystem feels very sane - especially compared to npm. Top notch Wasm support, cross compiling is a breeze. That said, coming from a FP background (mostly Haskell/JS, now TS) Rust is... hard. I do understand the basic rules of the borrow checker, I do conceptually understand lifetimes, but actually using th…
Yes.
> Should I avoid using closures all over the place?
Not necessarily.
> Should my code look more like C and less like Haskell?
Yes. Others sometimes don't like to hear this, but IMO, Rust is not at all functional. Passing functions around is not ergonomic (how many function types does Rust have again? Three?). Even making heavy use of Traits, especially generic ones, is difficult.
Rust is very much procedural. Java-style OOP doesn't work because of the borrowing/ownership. And FP style function composition doesn't work without Boxing everything. But then you'd need to be careful about reference cycles.
I’m learning rust right now and there is a lot to like. Steady updates like this are also very motivating. The ecosystem feels very sane - especially compared to npm. Top notch Wasm support, cross compiling is a breeze. That said, coming from a FP background (mostly Haskell/JS, now TS) Rust is... hard. I do understand the basic rules of the borrow checker, I do conceptually understand lifetimes, but actually using th…
It ends up being doable. I dabbled in ATS, developed Stockholm syndrome, and now Rust ain't too bad.
Higher-order functions are difficult in Rust or with linear/affine types in general. Haven't looked at what Rust does recently.
> Should I avoid using closures all over the place? Should my code look more like C and less like Haskell?
When in Rome do as the Romans :)
Anyway, some fun imperative programming stuff you can do in Rust that is fickle in Haskell (or OCaml/Standard ML).
If anyone wants to know more about const fns, see https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/functions.html#con... It is the Rust way of specifying a function as being _pure_. In other words the output is dependent only on the function arguments, and not on any external state. This means they can be evaluated at compile time. I suppose in the future, it could also allow better compiler optimizations.
Never worked with Rust, but I am pretty sure that having a function be pure is not enough to evaluate it at compile time.
I’m learning rust right now and there is a lot to like. Steady updates like this are also very motivating. The ecosystem feels very sane - especially compared to npm. Top notch Wasm support, cross compiling is a breeze. That said, coming from a FP background (mostly Haskell/JS, now TS) Rust is... hard. I do understand the basic rules of the borrow checker, I do conceptually understand lifetimes, but actually using th…
> Anyways, I guess this gets easier over time, right? Yes. > Should I avoid using closures all over the place? Not necessarily. > Should my code look more like C and less like Haskell? Yes. Others sometimes don't like to hear this, but IMO, Rust is not at all functional. Passing functions around is not ergonomic (how many function types does Rust have again? Three?). Even making heavy use of Traits, especially generi…
It has to, right? ATS has many function types as well, plus stack-allocated closures (I think Rust has that too??)
Are there any particular set of problems that I can solve systematically, so that I can learn all the features of Rust?
The most exciting component of this release is the const fn improvements. With loops and if available, you can now do non-trivial computation in const fn for the first time. It reduces the gap between Rust's const fn and C++'s constexpr to a large degree. Ultimately, the miri execution engine that this feature builds upon, supports a much larger set of features that even constexpr supports. It's been a project spanni…
This sounds promising. Can you give examples? I don't know Rust at all, and the reason I like C++ is its metaprogrammability.