| ▲ | codehero an hour ago |
| "Type systems are hard!"
As hard as its safety is pushed on us, not even Rust is free from hand waving. |
|
| ▲ | ahartmetz an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| At least Rust has a chance to be largely correct because it has much greater effort per amount of code (in the compiler) invested into it than most any application code. |
| |
|
| ▲ | doodpants an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I mean, Rust's whole shtick is safety, so that's really the only thing there is to "push" about the language. |
| |
| ▲ | oersted 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I wouldn’t say so… I consistently choose Rust mainly because it’s a sanely designed modern C++ alternative. It’s 20% more effort than writing Python or Typescript, and you get to use the full power of your hardware without compromise. Safety is a nice side-benefit. The main reason why I like the safety is because it allows you to fearlessly write high-level code without being constantly paranoid about memory as in C++. It’s more about enabling ergonomics without loosing performance, rather than security or correctness. | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 27 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The paranoia about memory use in C++ should mostly be a thing of the past if you’re using smart pointers and sane patterns. In 2026 almost nobody should be calling new and delete and passing around res pointers. |
| |
| ▲ | eloisius 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Rust has a lot of things that make it nice to write in. Robust enums and pattern matching are something I miss greatly when I’m back in C++. The trait inheritance system is also very flexible and I miss that. Especially compared to monstrosities like multiple inheritance. | |
| ▲ | hackingonempty 22 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Part of Rust's schtick is also cost free abstractions. |
|
|
| ▲ | caaqil an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > not even Rust is free from hand waving. It is moral though, so who cares really. |
