I am starting to learn Rust and the only reason I don’t intend on using it for GUI stuff for the time being is because I just like QtWidgets a lot and GUI toolkits in Rust are a pretty new thing.
Apart from that, pretty much all logic can benefit from a language that forces people to be more explicit.
Although I won’t consider it for larger projects until the borrow checker gets the overhaul it needs, because I’d rather not start hating another language.
What about the borrow checker needs an overhaul? Seems to do it’s job quite well. If you want to remove it then you should use like C++ or Zig or something since the borrow checker is fairly fundemenal to the design of the language
This may be cheating but yes, sometimes there are cycles in type/generic definitions and the compiler loops their identifiers over and over, nesting them inside each other
It’s not that I don’t like Rust, I just don’t know what to do with it
Feed it through a coffee grinder and mix it with similarly powdered aluminum.
Then set that on fire (bonus points for doing it on lake ice. That’s fun!)
Oh. Uh. Not that kind of rust?
No, but yours has more real-world applications
I am starting to learn Rust and the only reason I don’t intend on using it for GUI stuff for the time being is because I just like QtWidgets a lot and GUI toolkits in Rust are a pretty new thing.
Apart from that, pretty much all logic can benefit from a language that forces people to be more explicit.
Although I won’t consider it for larger projects until the borrow checker gets the overhaul it needs, because I’d rather not start hating another language.
What about the borrow checker needs an overhaul? Seems to do it’s job quite well. If you want to remove it then you should use like C++ or Zig or something since the borrow checker is fairly fundemenal to the design of the language
You use it to write programs.
Anything you used to make in C, C++, C# and Typescript
Excuse me but, can Rust even give me undecipherable Lore Ipsums of diagnostics at the same level that C++ can? If not, it’s not even a competition.
This may be cheating but yes, sometimes there are cycles in type/generic definitions and the compiler loops their identifiers over and over, nesting them inside each other
You are almost inspiring me to go see this live.
But be noted it’s really not a drop-in replacement language for C-derived languages. It’s more like OCaml with curly brackets.
Yes of course. But there is nothing you can’t do. Only thing that may retain some of you is tooling that wasn’t ported