News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The struggle with Rust. Parent comment

Re:The struggle with Rust by Bartweiss on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @10:05AM (#13471832)
OCaml seems like the argument against Rust's claim to trade usability for safety. It's not true for everything, I wouldn't write embedded OCaml, but it's an easy disproof-by-example for "Rust's difficulty is the inevitable price for trustworthy code!"

Which isn't to say OCaml is trivial, or Rust is useless (GC and threading both being limitations). It just makes me skeptical of claims that Rust's difficulty is irreducible.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The struggle with Rust by kibwen on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:22PM (#13473361)
Rust's difficulty relative to OCaml might be irreducible if we consider the difficulty added by not providing a pervasive GC, which is part of Rust's design goal and not part of OCaml's.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The struggle with Rust by Ar-Curunir on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:03PM (#13473140)
But OCaml isn't intended for the use cases Rust is intended for: a replacement for C and C++
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The struggle with Rust by pjmlp on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:54PM (#13473692)
It depends on the use cases you mean.

OCaml is actually used for many systems programming tasks that can live with a tracing GC.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The struggle with Rust by GregBuchholz on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:19PM (#13473332)
>I wouldn't write embedded OCaml

But you can run OCaml on a microcontroller:

http://www.algo-prog.info/ocapic/web/index.php?id=ocapic

[ Parent | on HN ]