Re:The struggle with Rust
by kibwen on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:33PM
(#13473472)
If you just want to write code that runs but that will suddenly break without warning an unknowable time into the future, then C++ has a lower learning curve. If you want to code defensively and write software that isn't going to eat your laundry, then the learning curve for C++ surpasses Rust in steepness, because of the sheer number of things you have to learn not to do.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
No student in any language learns by writing production ready code.
Anyone who thinks this is what it means to learn a language is attacking a strawman.
No strawman here. It's incorrect to believe that the process of learning a language has necessarily ended by the time that someone has begun putting code into production.
> No student in any language learns by writing production ready code.
OTOH, many students of programming languages learn by pushing their code (EDIT: ready or not) into production. Oh boy do they learn.
Worked for me when learning Go.
I think that says more about your idea of production ready code than it does the issue under discussion.
I didn't know a many useful "Goisms" at the time, but it was certainly code that didn't need drastic refactoring. I just picked up the language basics in a day, and 3 days later I was effectively writing code that I might certainly write better today, but it was functional, extensible and fault-tolerant.