| ▲ | elcritch a day ago | |
> I've started caring about semantics a lot more than syntax, which is why I also haven't looked at Zig, Nim, Odin, etc: I am no longer interested in "a better C". Well the post rambles a fair bit, IMHO. The whole bit about Go being “accidental” is BS given that Rust is just as much “accidental” in its origin and design. One thing stuck out to me is that Nim certainly isn’t a “better C”. It has a GC or you can use reference counting. You can use it as a better C if you really want. Nim’s type system avoids many of the problems that Go has, though it’s not nearly as pedantic as Rust. At the end of the day lots of software has been written and shipped in Go which runs fast, has minimal downtime, generally seems effective, and has minimal security issues. I’d argue (much) fewer software projects have been shipped in Rust. Firefox is still 95%+ C++. | ||
| ▲ | RMPR a day ago | parent [-] | |
> I’d argue (much) fewer software projects have been shipped in Rust. Firefox is still 95%+ C++. It's funny but this comment reminded me of this tweet[0] from 2022 (!). I don't have a horse in this race as I am happily using Python and C++ at $DAYJOB. I'd argue that even if much less software has been written in Rust (source?), it still qualifies as "lots of software has been written and shipped" with it. Not to mention all the investments by $BIGCORPS in the language. | ||