I find with C/++ I have to compile to find warnings and errors, while with Rust I get more information automatically due to the modern type and linking systems. As a result I compile Rust significantly less times which is a massive speed increase.

Rusts tooling is hands down better than C/++ which aids to a more streamlined and efficient development experience

▲

bch 5 days ago | parent [-]

> Rusts tooling is hands down better than C/++ which aids to a more streamlined and efficient development experience

Would you expand on this? What was your C tooling/workflow that was inferior to your new Rust experience?

▲

simonask 4 days ago | parent [-]

Not the GP, but the biggest one is dependency management. Cargo is just extremely good.

As for the language tooling itself, static and runtime analyzers in C and C++ (and these are table stakes at this point) do not come close to the level of accuracy of the Rust compiler. If you care about writing unsafe code, Miri is orders of magnitude better at detecting UB than any runtime analyzer I've seen for C and C++.

▲

uecker 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I do not think package management should be done at the level of programming languages.

	▲	adwn 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Strictly speaking, Cargo isn't part of the Rust programming language itself. Cargo is a layer on top of Rust, and you can use the Rust compiler completely independently of Cargo. I think bazel, for example, can compile and handle dependencies without Cargo.
	▲	simonask 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I agree, it should be done at the project level - that is, if you care about portability, reproducibility, deployment, etc.

▲

johnisgood 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Pacman is extremely good, too, for C. :)

▲

simonask 4 days ago | parent [-]

Pacman solves a different problem. Cargo manages your project's dependencies, not system packages.

	▲	johnisgood 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I know, but often that is all you need for C.