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

Rust is not a good C replacement

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–213 of 213 posts

Re: Rust is not a good C replacement

#211

Post by r-w »

village-idiot wrote: post #190
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm offering you an olive branch here. You can pile on the snark, or you can take my offer to issue a correction to my article. Edit: found the hostility. Fine, I won't issue a correction. I didn't find Steve's arguments entirely correct and I was willing to add a note to the page letting him share his perspective so the reader could make up their mind. Now I'm less open to that.

This is a very bad look, actively looking to punish others because they didn’t “accept your olive branch” after pointing out a mistake. I’d recommend you rethink your approach here.

I just think it’s absurd that @Sir_Cmpwn is using the rhetoric of peace and war in a discussion about a programming language.

Re: Rust is not a good C replacement

#212

Post by aidenn0 »

jhasse wrote: post #126
orwin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i disagree with the main article, but he is right. C++ was supposed to be more than just browsers, GUI and video games: it shuold have been a better C. It failed. It was supposed to be more secure than C. It failed. Mostly the OOP failed part, because it wasn't that good of an idea (usefull in some case, to do geometry and grapic stuff, and for other, specific cases). And Java's "everything is an object" did not help…

> it shuold have been a better C. It failed. It was supposed to be more secure than C. It failed. If it's worse and less secure than C, why is it so popular? Why didn't all people continue to use C?

It's not strictly better than C; that dosen't mean it's worse either. Language "goodness" isn't single-dimensional.
Post reply on HN