One way that Swift is certainly not more convenient than Rust is the tooling. I use a 2018 MacBook Air, using macOS 12, which is now unsupported by Xcode. Meanwhile SourceKit-LSP is treated as very much a second-class citizen. But Rust 1.81 and rust-analyzer build and run just fine.
Swift is a more convenient Rust
31–40 of 318 posts
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#32In many cases Swift would be a better choice than Rust, when the convenience and developer experience is worth trading for some performance. However, Swift's biggest problem is that any usage outside of the Apple ecosystem is a second(or third) class citizen. Until this is solved, Swift will remain mostly an Apple only language, regardless of how nice it is.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#33Hmmm...I disagree with a number of statements in the post but I think the following two hypotheses will make for more interesting discussion than some nitpicks: 1. A large part of why many people love Rust is that it's the first time they've used an ML family language. One of the innovations of Rust was to create a community that felt like home to Unix hackers who weren't programming language nerds. 2. Rust is the fi…
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#34However outside very specific use cases, where no kind of automatic resource management is allowed, no matter what, like in high integrity computing, or critical kernel code, approaches that mix and match both solutions are much more ergonomic.
Swift isn't the only one going down this route, we see it as well in D, Chapel, Linear Haskell, OCamml Effects, Mojo, Hylo, Koka, Veronica, and probably many other research languages being born during the last 5 years.
Because in the end, programming language ergonomics and expressiveness really matters for wide scale adoption.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#35One way that Swift is certainly not more convenient than Rust is the tooling. I use a 2018 MacBook Air, using macOS 12, which is now unsupported by Xcode. Meanwhile SourceKit-LSP is treated as very much a second-class citizen. But Rust 1.81 and rust-analyzer build and run just fine.
[flagged]
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#36Hmmm...I disagree with a number of statements in the post but I think the following two hypotheses will make for more interesting discussion than some nitpicks: 1. A large part of why many people love Rust is that it's the first time they've used an ML family language. One of the innovations of Rust was to create a community that felt like home to Unix hackers who weren't programming language nerds. 2. Rust is the fi…
> Rust is the first language to bring non-GC automatic memory management to the mainstream To nitpick, the first language to bring non-GC automatic memory management to the mainstream would be either Forth or C through stack memory. For heaps, we have reference counting, often handled automatically through the stack (e.g., C++ smart pointers). The thing Rust brought to mainstream is not automatic memory management -…
All with stack allocation.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#37One way that Swift is certainly not more convenient than Rust is the tooling. I use a 2018 MacBook Air, using macOS 12, which is now unsupported by Xcode. Meanwhile SourceKit-LSP is treated as very much a second-class citizen. But Rust 1.81 and rust-analyzer build and run just fine.
[flagged]
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#38Hmmm...I disagree with a number of statements in the post but I think the following two hypotheses will make for more interesting discussion than some nitpicks: 1. A large part of why many people love Rust is that it's the first time they've used an ML family language. One of the innovations of Rust was to create a community that felt like home to Unix hackers who weren't programming language nerds. 2. Rust is the fi…
When people bitch about the borrow checker, what they usually mean is “std::move is a great wristwatch but god damn does it chafe as a chastity belt”.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#39I keep trying to get into rust but I always hit a brick wall when looking at examples and the code looks so complicated. Examples like this straight from the rust website just make my eyes glaze over struct Task { future: Mutex >>, task_sender: SyncSender >, }
I'll grant you that is probably too complicated an example to appear early in the docs, but how often are you actually building multithreaded job dispatch systems from scratch (which appears to be what this example is doing), and how simple would it be in other languages?
(defrecord Task [future task-sender])
Probably used something like this: (defn create-task []
(let [future (atom nil)
task-sender (async/chan)]
(->Task future task-sender)))
Not sure it makes sense but a pretty much direct translation as far as it goes.Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#40> Rust invented the concept of ownership as a solution memory management issues without resorting to something slower like Garbage Collection or Reference Counting. They did it well, but not invented? There very many kinds of influeces: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/le7m54/is_it_fair_to_... Especially Cyclone, I think: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_(programming_languag...
[1] https://pauillac.inria.fr/~fpottier/slides/fpottier-2007-05-...