The Rust home page makes it sound like Rust is some sort of a panacea. It leads one to believe that they'll get the power of C++, but with greater "safety".
But the more I look into Rust, the more uneasy I start to feel.
Despite all of the claims about how Rust is safer and leads to better code, the Rust compiler and standard library, both of which are implemented in Rust, are full of bugs [github.com]! Don't forget that this is Rust code written by people who ought to know Rust better than anyone else; they designed the language after all! If they can't write non-buggy Rust code, then we shouldn't expect less-talented Rust users to be able to do any better.
It's also a big problem that there's only one implementation. If you run into a bug with it, and they don't fix it promptly, then you're likely fucked. At least with C++ there are multiple high quality implementations from different vendors. You can use GCC and Clang on most platforms. Then there are other systems like Intel C++, MSVC++, and so forth. You aren't left at the mercy of a single implementation when you use C++.
The syntax of Rust is unremarkable. It's like a bad version of C++ in many ways. Its resource management approach is also inflexible and impractical, despite the claims that it's one of Rust's most significant benefits. You're typically better off using modern C++ techniques. You'll get just about the same amount of safety, but with much fewer headaches. Even C++'s standard library, which is not known for being very good, is often better than Rust's.
It took them forever to get Rust 1.0 released. They were constantly changing their mind about anything and everything. While some evolution of a programming language is to be expected, all we saw from them was spastic thrashing about. It got so bad that you couldn't write code on a Monday and reliably have it compile by the following Friday! The fact that it took libcore up until release 1.6 to "stabilize" just goes to show how bad things were. The supposed "stable" release was full of non-stable interfaces!
The Rust community gives me a particularly bad feeling. They're rather tyrannical about enforcing their code of conduct. They even have a moderation attack squad [rust-lang.org] to go after anyone they deem to be an enemy! I've never seen this kind of orchestrated control exerted over the community of any other programming language. This sets off warning alarms for me.
There's no reason to use Rust, in my opinion. You're better off with C++, or D, or Java, or Scala, or C#, or Go, or Swift, or one of the many other non-Rust languages out there. The language isn't very good, the standard libraries aren't very good, there's only one implementation, and the attitude of the community is downright frightening. I think you're better off not using Rust.
Rust really riles people up for some reason, both pro- and against shills. It's fascinating. Never seen anything like it with other languages.
Levi Anderson
Low effort b8
David Hernandez
Perhaps it's 'because'' of the claims about how Rust is safer. It could be that the "safety" claims make programmers complacent and attract shitcoders too dumb for C++.
That's what you get from unstandardized languages driven by hipsters with a pseudo-academic mindset employed by a single (shitty) corporation.
It's like some weird cargo-cult attempt at imitating C++, but different for the sake of being different. The result, of course, is a mess.
Indeed. Imagine if all the brain power that goes into fighting with the borrow checker went into making quality software.
Logan Martin
The syntax was created to attract C/C++ idiots, but they're not really getting C/C++ idiots because it's too different so they can't understand it, and they're alienating everyone else because C/C++ syntax is bad. They should have copied OCaml because it's more elegant and it fits the semantics better.
why does this matter????????? btw: C has been standardized by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) since 1989
really makes me think..............
Xavier Brown
Unrelated but do you have an actual argument for why rust syntax is worse than perl?
Jackson Torres
rust always wanted the webdev/wymyn crowd because C/C++ programmers are all evil white cis men
Owen Howard
yeah_well_thats_just_like_your_opinion_man.webm
Camden Phillips
IMO there are two reasons for that: 1. Rust leadership is very political, so whenever Rust is mentioned there is political debate. 2. Aggressive shilling for Rust on many places on the Internet.
It matters because it keeps things stable enough to not invalidate your code every week and ensures that the future of the language isn't in the hands of a bunch of social justice lunatics.
Really makes me think about how screwed those languages would have been had Dennis Ritchie and Bjarne Stroustrup been retarded sjw hipsters.
Everything they touch turns to shit. I don't think they could have done worse.
Noah Collins
holy shit you are retarded.
Ian Gonzalez
wow, how dumb can you be?
Kevin Robinson
lol retard
Juan Roberts
wew lad, stop being a subhuman
James Davis
ww subhoomin stop being a lad
Andrew Rogers
ebin
Gavin Ward
u both rusty :DDD
Ryan Foster
all me xdddddddddddddddddddddddddd XDDDDDDDDDXDXDXDXDXDDDDXDDDD
Adrian Rodriguez
HURF DURF IM RETARDED
Samuel Lopez
rust proselytizers are like scientology zombies or jehovah's witnesses. they need to take their ocd meds and get de-culted. it's why I would never touch rust. can you imagine working around those guys? they're worse than arch users.
Connor Hall
...
Sebastian Adams
None of these garbage-collected languages are comparable to Rust.
So? Anything that hasn't hit 1.0 yet should be considered unfit for production code. This isn't a problem.
Jonathan Collins
I was trying hard but I lost the game at this point. Bravo!
Bentley Phillips
It's difficult to focus on silly things like shipping code when you have to spend hundreds of hours triaging every panic attack of snowflakes who have a mental breakdown when they see a keyword or term that sets them off.
Henry Torres
This is why rust will ultimately fail.
Juan Smith
Good post, even though I'm just a casual observer who has yet to touch Rust.
The cult-like community of Rust, if that's true, is rather "problematic" if you forgive my use of the word. A programming language is a tool that must be spread and adopted due to its technical merits, not the political and social leanings of its proponents.
Anyway, you suggest a list of languages at the end of your post, one of which is D. I was led to believe D was essentially dead. Is it not?
Jose Sanchez
It is, don't bother with it.
Carson Thomas
What about the others?
Gabriel Martinez
If your team consists of good programmers use C++ If your team consists of millenial retards and or pajeets use Java Go is another meme language only meant for specific niche jobs at google but for some reason retards thought it was a C replacement
Ayden Jones
Ur mum is ded, motherfucker.
D is alive and well in multiple implementations.
You want the D?!
I'll give you the D, CUNT!
Noah Torres
This, and rustaceans ask for it. And that^ Rust shills needs to stop, you've got to be a goddam moron to use rust/help them expand while they are a bunch of monsters.
Jackson Evans
This so much^. All the rustfags are so goddamn smart with their "safe" language, acting as if it was the next coming of Christ. There's no way I'm gonna trust people like that.
A language isn't going to make you not human, user. Are you defective?
Dominic Morales
Out of curiosity, I ran scan-build on the C++ project I wrote for my company which has bloated up to about 100k LoC after 11 years in service and is all my own code. It's never had a static analyzer run on it because I don't believe in them. It turned up two "errors":
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6.3.0/../../../../include/c++/6.3.0/bits/regex.h:1577:7: error: exception specification of explicitly defaulted move constructor does not match the calculated one match_results(match_results&& __rhs) noexcept = default;
This is gcc's problem, not mine. It's also so incredibly minor as to be irrelevant to anyone, and it's completely irrelevant for my code as it's not even used.
warning: Access to field 'cmsg_level' results in a dereference of a null pointer (loaded from variable 'cmsghdr') cmsghdr->cmsg_level = SOL_SOCKET;
Now that one got my attention as this code is pretty important (I'm kindof a big deal). So what is it complaining about? Here's the segment of code:
There's absolutely no way this segment of code could ever be a null pointer deference. Yet shitty static anal has now wasted 30 minutes of my night and my C++ code remains FLAWLESS. So yes, good programmers do not write shit C++. But good programmers do not write shit anything. If you have shitty code coming out of a good programmer, they aren't actually a good programmer.
Hunter Bell
epic larp bro. i too am a c++ god. fuck those plebs right XDDD
I went to college (MS from the UC system in CS) but I've never used my degree on a resume. Or used my resume. All my jobs have been offered to me through visibility in Free Software or when showing off like an asshole.
Adrian Wright
Nobody said that. Of course humans will make errors. So it is necessary to make the most damaging and hard errors impossible to make. Almost all languages except C, C++ and their direct supersets solve that problem. Therefore you must have a special reason to write in C or C++. (maybe for you the reason is you being autistic and not thinking practically)
Brody Rodriguez
Which language is objectively better than C++?
Justin Hughes
Fairy tale teller confirmed.
Lincoln Gomez
Any language is better than C++, even C is better than this crap.
Jackson Ward
Oh, you're just a larper
Thomas Carter
Can you speak proper English, nigger?
Hudson Lopez
Just go back to reddit already
Cameron Reyes
Thats mostly my only gripe with Rust, fucking reliability. It would be helpful to establish something that will always be "safe reliability" set of Rust.
Lincoln Cooper
I've yet to hear at least one argument from your side. Only saw horse shit so far.
James Nguyen
Except you never made an argument. Great argument
Andrew Powell
...
Justin Watson
How do you know that the bugs in question were produced by "good" programmers? q.e.d not an argument after all
Austin Lopez
Are you implying that even the most big, successful and important free software projects have contributions from bad programmers?
Chase Hughes
How is this not obvious? The large majority of all "programmers" are shit. Most people across all jobs are not qualified to do their actual job why would it be different for programmers?
Austin Wood
So you think that only you should write software (in C++ of course) and everybody else must quit programming? Or that shit programmers must write code with security holes and it's okay?
Blake Howard
Not him, but shit programmers should quit programming.
Cameron Morris
larpers should stop posting here
Luke Rogers
If only that rule was around in 1969. There would be no C or Unix.
Wyatt Lopez
If the rule was actually in effect today then there would be no Rust either :^)
Jason Ward
Would you quit programming?
Jason Stewart
Why THE FUCK does the rust webpage need js to show words on the screen? Using umatrix it shows a white page.
Ryder Howard
the website is powered by rust, they compile it down into webrust which is a js subset
Lincoln Perry
Who needs rust when you have C++17?
Kevin Myers
I see the statement is quite controversial among some people. I wonder why :^)
Robert Ward
im sure most of us here agree with it. it just wont happen.
Ayden Morales
I actually just got a contracting job on a vidya gaem through modding it. Devs contacted me via my email registered with the forum. Once again, I have never needed my resume or proof of education. All you have to do is show you can do things and people will take interest in you. You have no idea how rare "can do things" is, and how hard it is to find those people.
