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

Rust 0.3 released

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#21

Post by jpd »

pcwalton wrote: post #20
cpeterso wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I like many of Rust's language concepts (and I have contributed some small fixes to the Rust runtime), but (to my eyes :) the syntax is snowballing into a hybrid of C++ and APL.

What in particular do you not like? To me the proposed stuff on the roadmap fixes the problems I see (changing "::" to ".", camel case for type names, "alt" -> "match", => after pattern matches, #debug to debug!, removing argument modes -- no guarantees that we implement these of course, they need consensus), but I'm curious as to what your thoughts are.

Instead of angled_brackets they should probably try to go with D's style of templates[1], which uses an operater !, to signify its use.

Also, I personally believe that camel case for type names would be a net loss; the underscore separates the words nicely, and I think it's pretty clear from the syntax what is and is not a type name (in my extremely limited experience).

[1]. http://dlang.org/templates-revisited.html

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#22

Post by sandGorgon »

Can Rust retarget GTK or QT ? Actually, the important question is whether it is meant to.

Will it ever be intended to replace application languages like Vala, Mono (used to write Tomboy, Banshee, etc.) or will it be restricted to system level stuff.

If yes, will there ever be scripting support (like Ocaml https://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/80)

edit: Rust has a nice decentralized package manager as well called Cargo https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Doc-using-cargo-to-mana... ) Pretty nice.

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#23

Post by pcwalton »

sandGorgon wrote: post #22

Can Rust retarget GTK or QT ? Actually, the important question is whether it is meant to. Will it ever be intended to replace application languages like Vala, Mono (used to write Tomboy, Banshee, etc.) or will it be restricted to system level stuff. If yes, will there ever be scripting support (like Ocaml https://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/80 ) edit: Rust has a nice decentralized package manager as well called Carg…

Yes, Rust is intended to play nicely with GTK and Qt. For one, browser engines need to interface to the platform-native toolkits.

Scripting support would be cool. To me, Rust isn't necessarily the best language to write small one-off scripts in; I personally prefer dynamically typed languages (or whole-program type-inferred languages) for that. But if you want to write scripts in Rust, I'd certainly review any pull requests to make it easier :)

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#24

Post by stewbrew »

What problem does rust solve other languages (D, SML, OCaml, C++11, Objective C, vala, go etc.) did not -- apart from helping with the NIH syndrome? Does Mozilla actually use a language that still is a moving target with respect to its language specification for some substantial work (or what is the real-world status of that upcoming rendering engine which seems to be the reason why rust was called into life)?

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#25

Post by pjmlp »

stewbrew wrote: post #24

What problem does rust solve other languages (D, SML, OCaml, C++11, Objective C, vala, go etc.) did not -- apart from helping with the NIH syndrome? Does Mozilla actually use a language that still is a moving target with respect to its language specification for some substantial work (or what is the real-world status of that upcoming rendering engine which seems to be the reason why rust was called into life)?

I guess it is the need to explore new ideas, even if the language dies, some of its ideas might be picked up by mainstream languages.

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#26

Post by dbaupp »

stewbrew wrote: post #24

What problem does rust solve other languages (D, SML, OCaml, C++11, Objective C, vala, go etc.) did not -- apart from helping with the NIH syndrome? Does Mozilla actually use a language that still is a moving target with respect to its language specification for some substantial work (or what is the real-world status of that upcoming rendering engine which seems to be the reason why rust was called into life)?

The project FAQ[1] gives a bit of an overview of the reasons for Rust, as does the language FAQ[2].

And, I think the answer is no, Mozilla doesn't do any production-ready work with Rust.

[1]: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Doc-project-FAQ [2]: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Doc-language-FAQ

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#27

Post by sandGorgon »

pcwalton wrote: post #23
sandGorgon wrote: post #22

Can Rust retarget GTK or QT ? Actually, the important question is whether it is meant to. Will it ever be intended to replace application languages like Vala, Mono (used to write Tomboy, Banshee, etc.) or will it be restricted to system level stuff. If yes, will there ever be scripting support (like Ocaml https://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/80 ) edit: Rust has a nice decentralized package manager as well called Carg…

Yes, Rust is intended to play nicely with GTK and Qt. For one, browser engines need to interface to the platform-native toolkits. Scripting support would be cool. To me, Rust isn't necessarily the best language to write small one-off scripts in; I personally prefer dynamically typed languages (or whole-program type-inferred languages) for that. But if you want to write scripts in Rust, I'd certainly review any pull r…

I'm more interested in an alternative to write desktop apps in, rather than small one off scripts.

I'm interested in this from a vision point of view. What are going to be your first "written-using-Rust" apps ? Firefox is gargantuan, so it cant be your first. Ergo, the question about platform toolkit compatibility. If you build that one first, you will start spawning an ecosystem almost instantly... if you want.

Mono, Vala, etc. have nice apps that people love. I am wondering on how can you bridge the gap between javascript/Qtscript and Rust to make it easier to build apps in.

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#28

Post by switch33 »

Two of the newest programming languages that I think have potential are Io and Rust. Io is a mash up of languages with speed similar to lua and has a list like syntax of lisp.

I wonder if anyone can explain why they have not tried to incorporate some of lisp's syntax as it is more efficient for linked lists I think. And I thought part of the reason for Rust's development was for very fast/efficient concurrency that is properly garbage collected.

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#29

Post by zokier »

sandGorgon wrote: post #27
pcwalton wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Rust is intended to play nicely with GTK and Qt. For one, browser engines need to interface to the platform-native toolkits. Scripting support would be cool. To me, Rust isn't necessarily the best language to write small one-off scripts in; I personally prefer dynamically typed languages (or whole-program type-inferred languages) for that. But if you want to write scripts in Rust, I'd certainly review any pull r…

I'm more interested in an alternative to write desktop apps in, rather than small one off scripts. I'm interested in this from a vision point of view. What are going to be your first "written-using-Rust" apps ? Firefox is gargantuan, so it cant be your first. Ergo, the question about platform toolkit compatibility. If you build that one first, you will start spawning an ecosystem almost instantly... if you want. Mono…

>What are going to be your first "written-using-Rust" apps ?

Rust compiler is written in rust, so that would be the first "written-using-Rust" app. Additionally afaik the work on rust-based web-browser (engine) has began, so that would be second (major) project for rust.

Re: Rust 0.3 released

#30

Post by switch33 »

switch33 wrote: post #28

Two of the newest programming languages that I think have potential are Io and Rust. Io is a mash up of languages with speed similar to lua and has a list like syntax of lisp. I wonder if anyone can explain why they have not tried to incorporate some of lisp's syntax as it is more efficient for linked lists I think. And I thought part of the reason for Rust's development was for very fast/efficient concurrency that i…

Actually what I read here seems rather relevant to my opinion on what maybe should be discussed about implementation to Rust: http://www.antigreen.org/vadim/ProgLanguageComparison/lisp-c...
Post reply on HN