C++ with extra steps?
C++ with a package manager.
Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
111–120 of 269 posts
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#112Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#113[flagged]
And you were right.
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#114My controversial opinion:
If Rust were to "borrow" something from the C/C++ spirit, then disabling the borrow checker should be available as a compiler option.
As in, you're an adult: if you want it, you can have it, instead of "we know better".
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Straitjackets can be very useful. Only if you’re insane.
How dare you. C is a fine language. Just don't accidentally step on any of these landmines and we'll all get along great.
Not to mention your sidearm is a Sig P365. We like to call them footguns.
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#116[flagged]
Could you please not post this sort of snarky-generic-meta comment? They attract upvotes and then stick at the top of the thread, choking out actually interesting discussion. (That's where this one was, but I'm going to mark it off topic and downweight it now.)
I completely understand your frustration about how common shallow-indignant comments are. But it doesn't help to post shallow-indignant or snarky comments of your own about it - it just produces even more of the same, or worse.
The way to combat shallow-indignant, predictable, tedious, etc., threads is to find something that you're genuinely curious and open about, and post from that place instead.
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#117My controversial opinion: If Rust were to "borrow" something from the C/C++ spirit, then disabling the borrow checker should be available as a compiler option. As in, you're an adult: if you want it, you can have it, instead of "we know better".
If you could disable the borrow checker globally, projects would do it, and it would become impossible to compile anything with it enabled.
You can already disable it locally: the unsafe keyword is for that.
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you write correct Rust code it'll work, the borrowck is just that, a check, if the teacher doesn't check your homework where you wrote that 10 + 5 = 15 it's still correct. If you write incorrect code where you break Rust's borrowing rules it'll have unbounded Undefined Behaviour, unlike the actual Rust where that'd be an error this thing will just give you broken garbage, exactly like a C++ compiler. Evidently mil…
People don't want garbage. But in any case, they don't want straightjackets like the borrow checker. Hence, they use GC'd languages like Go whenever they can.
You call it a straightjacket, I call it a railroad track for reliably delivering software.
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#119I'm the author of this repo. I see some really angry comments, some of them even personal. Obviously I didn't think that just by tinkering with a compiler, I'd get personally attacked, but anyway, fair enough. For those of you confused: yes, this started as a satirical project with the corroded lib. Then I thought "why not just remove the borrow checker?" without any real motivation. Then I just went ahead and did it…
I think there is probably a way to do what you're doing with unsafe. You could write a library that copies handles and can dump potentially freed memory afterwards.
Re: Rust--: Rust without the borrow checker
#120I'm the author of this repo. I see some really angry comments, some of them even personal. Obviously I didn't think that just by tinkering with a compiler, I'd get personally attacked, but anyway, fair enough. For those of you confused: yes, this started as a satirical project with the corroded lib. Then I thought "why not just remove the borrow checker?" without any real motivation. Then I just went ahead and did it…
[dead]