My favorite Rust function

Post by crimsonalucard » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 3:41 PM UTC

dullgiulio wrote: post #171

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.…

Those above are not integers but type that you have to explicitly cast integers to if you really want. Please don't make uninformed comments.

Post by coldtea » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 4:22 PM UTC

bsg75 wrote: post #179

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…

> Go lacks the semantic density needed to express solutions in both a concise and consistent manner. That is a difficult statement for a Go user to parse. It is referring to a lack of language features that result in verbosity or boilerplate?

Post by likeliv » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 4:24 PM UTC

dorfsmay wrote: post #178

likeliv wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is perfect fine to take by value something that is not Copy to transfer its ownership. It is a compiler error to use the value after it was moved. And the compiler error is quite explicit about how to solve it For example you can explicitly clone let y = add(x.clone()); let z = add(x);

What would be cases where the add() function need ownership of the x? What the chance in real life that a function like that cannot simply use a reference? In my learning Rust, my life became significantly better and easier when I started to references to borrow as much as possible.

Post by dorfsmay » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 6:17 PM UTC

likeliv wrote: post #185

dorfsmay wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be cases where the add() function need ownership of the x? What the chance in real life that a function like that cannot simply use a reference? In my learning Rust, my life became significantly better and easier when I started to references to borrow as much as possible.

That was just an example. But maybe 'x' is a BigInt type that use a memory allocation to store its contents. The ownership would be transferred to the return value

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 9:49 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #182

vertex-four wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I occasionally program Go because it has an amazing amount of libraries - I basically use it for random microservice type things that glue systems together. (Most recently, an HTTP login endpoint that sends and receives XMPP messages to authenticate the user.) I don't like it. I program Rust the rest of the time. I'm considering learning Perl5 so that at least my type system lets me do vaguely expressive things - I'm…

"unacceptably crippled" is a pejorative meant to insult, not a descriptive criticism.