Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
1–10 of 274 posts
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#2> Memory Safe
> No garbage collector, no manual memory management. A work in progress, though.
I couldn't find an explanation in the docs or elsewhere how Rue approaches this.
If not GC, is it via:
a) ARC
b) Ownership (ala Rust)
c) some other way?
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#3Probably best to link to the repo itself, this is not meant to be used yet. https://github.com/rue-language/rue
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#4> Memory Safe > No garbage collector, no manual memory management. A work in progress, though. I couldn't find an explanation in the docs or elsewhere how Rue approaches this. If not GC, is it via: a) ARC b) Ownership (ala Rust) c) some other way?
I am playing around with this! I'm mostly interested in something in the space of linear types + mutable value semantics.
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#5> Memory Safe > No garbage collector, no manual memory management. A work in progress, though. I couldn't find an explanation in the docs or elsewhere how Rue approaches this. If not GC, is it via: a) ARC b) Ownership (ala Rust) c) some other way?
[deleted]
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#6> Memory Safe > No garbage collector, no manual memory management. A work in progress, though. I couldn't find an explanation in the docs or elsewhere how Rue approaches this. If not GC, is it via: a) ARC b) Ownership (ala Rust) c) some other way?
I am playing around with this! I'm mostly interested in something in the space of linear types + mutable value semantics.
Nice! I see you're one of (if not the primary) contributor!
Do you see this as a prototype language, or as something that might evolve into something production grade? What space do you see it fitting into, if so?
You've been such a huge presence in the Rust space. What lessons do you think Rue will take, and where will it depart?
I see compile times as a feature - that's certainly nice to see.
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#7I always thought of Go as low level and Rust as high level. Go has a lot of verbosity as a "better C" with GC. Rust has low level control but many functional inspired abstractions. Just try writing iteration or error handling in either one to see.
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#8I wince every time I see naive recursive fibonacci as a code example. It is a major turnoff because it hints at a lack of experience with tail call optimization, which I consider a must have for a serious language.
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#9I wince every time I see naive recursive fibonacci as a code example. It is a major turnoff because it hints at a lack of experience with tail call optimization, which I consider a must have for a serious language.
Would someone please explain to me why TCO—seemingly alone amongst the gajillions of optimization passes performed by modern compilers—is so singularly important to some people?
Re: Rue: Higher level than Rust, lower level than Go
#10I wince every time I see naive recursive fibonacci as a code example. It is a major turnoff because it hints at a lack of experience with tail call optimization, which I consider a must have for a serious language.
I only have basic constant folding yet in terms of optimizations, but I'm very aware of TCO. I haven't decided if I want to require an annotation to guarantee it like Rust is going to.