Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I can write rust on a decade old machine without issues
Depends on how much time you have to wait for clean builds, recompiling the same crates from scratch.
Swift is a more convenient Rust
41–50 of 318 posts
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#42Hmmm...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…
> These alternatives take the approach that tracking ownership is not the default, which is fine for the majority of programs and far more ergonomic.
If you want non-default safety you do not need to leave C++. That is why unlike all these new languages, Rust makes difference.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#43Hmmm...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…
Ad 3) Scala is quite a bit older than the others, I'd put it in a previous generation. I always saw Kotlin as a more convenient Java, without Scalas heavy tilt towards FP. Java also added the equivalent of sum types with sealed interfaces and exhaustive pattern matching, does that make Java an ML language? Many older languages by now have incorporated valuable parts of FP/ML (including Javascript, Java, C++, ...) Bor…
> does that make Java an ML language?
not really, the type-system-sublanguage is still modelled like classy OOP, not more like MLy modules.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Is upgrading every 5-6 years to be able to write code considered normal in the Apple world? I'd been comfortably writing code in several languages using latest toolchains on a decade-old Intel machine just a few months ago, and was forced to upgrade because one of the components died. Otherwise I'd be using it for at least five more years.
frankly, late intel macs just sucked with their power-to-capability ratios. progress since M1 haven't been that incredible.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#45I don’t know Rust, but I’m loving Swift for systems programming. Most recent project was an 802.1Q SRP implementation and I couldn’t imagine going back to C. Higher up the stack, I’ve also used it with a custom runner to build the business logic for an embedded Flutter app. My only beef is that the binaries are quite large. I’m hoping the new Foundation will improve things, in the interim I’m trying to eliminate my F…
You can get much smaller native binaries with .NET's NativeAOT nowadays: https://github.com/MichalStrehovsky/sizegame Funnily enough, I'm using C# to solve quite a similar type of tasks. It's a really pleasant experience.
Native AOT needs to get better tooling ergonomics though, the whole publish process is a bit convoluted versus toolchains that have AOT compilation as their default.
Not counting having to learn about IL trimming, and the whole AOT compatible libraries.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#46One 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]
Buying a computer is not a reasonable response to a comment about bad tooling.
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#47One 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]
The modern tooling not being available for common hardware that's only a few years old is a problem with the tooling
Re: Swift is a more convenient Rust
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Is upgrading every 5-6 years to be able to write code considered normal in the Apple world? I'd been comfortably writing code in several languages using latest toolchains on a decade-old Intel machine just a few months ago, and was forced to upgrade because one of the components died. Otherwise I'd be using it for at least five more years.
> Is upgrading every 5-6 years to be able to write code considered normal in the Apple world?
Yes, pretty much