News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust vs C Pitfalls by blub on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @06:52AM (#13269942)
Easy on the propaganda there.

* "First viable replacement for C" - C++ was invented decades before Rust.

* "Well-written C programs translate almost 1:1 to Rust" - C programs can be compiled with minimal changes as C++.

* "or didn't offer meaningful improvement in safety/concurrency/expressiveness." - C++ offers major improvements in all of those areas.

A lot of C programmers don't want to switch to C++ and they won't want to switch to Rust either, because they favor simplicity and neither Rust nor C++ are simple. They'll probably switch to golang for some stuff if anything and just stick to C for the rest.

Re:Rust vs C Pitfalls by pornel on Thursday December 29, 2016 @06:39AM (#13276802)
I'm a C programmer who switched to Rust.

Rust is complex because it's powerful.

C++ is complex because it's a mashup of overlapping features from different eras.

I don't write C++, because whatever I write will crash for subtle reasons and I'll be told it's my fault, because of course you don't do this when you use that feature.

I can write Rust with all its complexity, and as long as I get it to compile, I'm confident it works more reliably than any C++ that I could have written.