Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My favorite Rust function

blog.jabid.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: My favorite Rust function

#131

Post by HeyImAlex »

crimsonalucard wrote: post #120
shhsshs wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Enumerations type myEnum int const ( someValue myEnum = iota anotherValue moreValues ) > Sum types Consider thinking about the types in your sum type and what they have in common, and define an interface that they share. > Recursive types Not sure what you mean. This is valid Go: type tree struct { value int left *tree right *tree } > Parametric polymorphism Yes Go sucks in this area. `sort.Interface` is a good exa…

> Enumerations - those are integers not enumerations. In Golang they have a type Bool which is either true or false. Can I define my own type using the same convention in GoLang? No. I can't. Ideally I want the ability to do this: type Bool = Enum { True False } or type Tri = Enum { True False QuantumTrueFalseDuality } But in Golang I'm locked in with what the creators provided as primitive types. I can't go deeper.…

Isn’t that JSON example the same in python, javascript, and ruby?

Unmarshalling into an interface is really just a shitty enum; the number of permutations is finite. A type switch here is like a match but less type safe because it won’t check exhaustiveness of the branches.

Re: My favorite Rust function

#132

Post by blub »

jchw wrote: post #22

> or making the language unacceptably crippled like Go Gotta say, I lost a lot of respect for the author at this point. It’s not like I don’t love Rust - quite the contrary - but if the only takeaway from Go for you is that it is “unacceptably crippled” then I feel you have missed a lot of insight. Go has been one of my languages of choice for over half a decade now, and for good reason.

Rust was born as a critique towards C and C++ and putting down other languages is part of the community DNA.

Go is a favorite target, but Python, Ada, Java, C# etc didn't remain unscathed either.

Re: My favorite Rust function

#133

Post by AdieuToLogic »

root_axis wrote: post #121
AdieuToLogic wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In my anecdotal experience, the type of programmers that evangelize and talk shit about programming languages tend to be on the less informed side of the knowledge spectrum. Or maybe they have just expanded their "knowledge spectrum" and are experiencing an effusive moment?

Talking shit isn't effusive. It's possible to enjoy a programming language without openly denigrating others you regard as inferior.

It's apparent you have dealt with negative situations such as you describe. Here is a haiku which may be helpful:

  Those who can will do,
  Those who cannot will seek to,
  Hide that fact from you.
HTH

Re: My favorite Rust function

#135

Post by AdieuToLogic »

ErotemeObelus wrote: post #126
AdieuToLogic wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > or making the language unacceptably crippled like Go > ... if the only takeaway from Go for you is that it is “unacceptably crippled” then I feel you have missed a lot of insight. Perhaps the author used a poor choice of words and instead could have phrased their intent along the lines of: Go lacks the semantic density needed to express solutions in both a concise and consistent manner. Were this the case, it wou…

I think it's a syntax problem. ASCII doesn't have enough bracket characters to simply & clearly represent necessary language features. So it's harder for an intelligent human to sort and categorize these aspects. Pre-generics Java is about the appropriate amount of language complexity for our current lingua franca

> Pre-generics Java is about the appropriate amount of language complexity for our current lingua franca

I am not sure to whom you are referencing as being "our", so I can only say I disagree as there are many developers which are quite adept in languages having more complexity than "pre-generics Java."

Perhaps you meant to reply to a different comment?

Re: My favorite Rust function

#136

Post by kissgyorgy »

baby wrote: post #116
c3534l wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go is simple to the point where it annoys a lot of programmers, especially programmers who like to do fancy stuff with their programming language (the kind of person that's attracted to Rust, for instance).

I’m mostly working with Rust, and I really like it, and I can even understand why WRITING Golang can be frustrating at times, but it should be clear to everyone that Golang is the best language to READ.

God no. Python is the best language to read! Go is too verbose.

Re: My favorite Rust function

#137

Post by crimsonalucard »

HeyImAlex wrote: post #131
crimsonalucard wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Enumerations - those are integers not enumerations. In Golang they have a type Bool which is either true or false. Can I define my own type using the same convention in GoLang? No. I can't. Ideally I want the ability to do this: type Bool = Enum { True False } or type Tri = Enum { True False QuantumTrueFalseDuality } But in Golang I'm locked in with what the creators provided as primitive types. I can't go deeper.…

Isn’t that JSON example the same in python, javascript, and ruby? Unmarshalling into an interface is really just a shitty enum; the number of permutations is finite. A type switch here is like a match but less type safe because it won’t check exhaustiveness of the branches.

>Isn’t that JSON example the same in python, javascript, and ruby?

No. Python doesn't have type checking. That example is a made up syntax of golang if golang had all the correct type primitives.

In this example I am defining a type in the first line, similar to how you would define a struct in golang. Then using the type in the second line.

There is a bit of an error, but it's too late to edit it now. the Struct in the type line should be map[string]JSON.

>Unmarshalling into an interface is really just a shitty enum; the number of permutations is finite.

The permutations of JSON are infinite. In the real world there are APIs describing deeply hierarchical data that have unpredictable deeply nested data structures. If I had a random JSON string generator, it's not that straightforward how you would save that JSON to a correctly typed variable in a GO program.

Unmarshalling you will have to define a new type for every permutation. It makes more sense to traverse the data structure to find it's structure rather then take a wild guess.

Either way in golang that "guess" happens at runtime so it will spit out an error at runtime, while with sum types and match you are type safe before the program even runs.

Re: My favorite Rust function

#138

Post by estebank »

gpm wrote: post #42
tux1968 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this implicit Copy trait interact with the Drop function? Doesn't that mean that the implicit copy would be dropped rather than the actual value for those types?

The compiler prevents you from implementing both Copy and Drop (i.e. a destructor). So dropping any copy type is a no-op.

And that is precisely the reason for the restriction.

Re: My favorite Rust function

#139

Post by emptysea »

baby wrote: post #97
jchw wrote: post #22

> or making the language unacceptably crippled like Go Gotta say, I lost a lot of respect for the author at this point. It’s not like I don’t love Rust - quite the contrary - but if the only takeaway from Go for you is that it is “unacceptably crippled” then I feel you have missed a lot of insight. Go has been one of my languages of choice for over half a decade now, and for good reason.

I work with Rust only these days, it’s really an awesome language and I wish everyone working with system languages would switch to Rust. Yet, I find Golang to be a much clearer language to read (and I read a shit ton of code). I hope they don’t add generics, but I wish they would options, results, sum types in general, redeclaring variables, the ? Operator, etc.

How would Option, Result, and sum types work without generics?

Re: My favorite Rust function

#140

Post by pjmlp »

ErotemeObelus wrote: post #126
AdieuToLogic wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > or making the language unacceptably crippled like Go > ... if the only takeaway from Go for you is that it is “unacceptably crippled” then I feel you have missed a lot of insight. Perhaps the author used a poor choice of words and instead could have phrased their intent along the lines of: Go lacks the semantic density needed to express solutions in both a concise and consistent manner. Were this the case, it wou…

I think it's a syntax problem. ASCII doesn't have enough bracket characters to simply & clearly represent necessary language features. So it's harder for an intelligent human to sort and categorize these aspects. Pre-generics Java is about the appropriate amount of language complexity for our current lingua franca

It surely isn't mine, otherwise I wouldn't be happily using Java 13 right now.

Also even Google does have more stuff going on Java, C++, Dart, Kotlin and TypeScript than Go, which has more uptake outside Googleplex.

Post reply on HN