100 days with Rust: a series of brick walls

Re:100 days with Rust: a series of brick walls by paulddraper on Sunday March 25, 2018 @10:46AM (#16672383)

> less to do with Rust itself, and more to do with this seemingly horrible futures library

Doesn't almost every major programming language have Futures though? (C++, Java, Python, Ruby, JavaScript, Go).

It seems a fair criticism for so common a building block.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:100 days with Rust: a series of brick walls by gnode on Monday March 26, 2018 @08:00AM (#16678174)

For a long time C++ and Javascript did not have futures. Rust is relatively new, and futures aren't part of the language proper yet. The problem is that the author's criticism of Rust seems to all hinge around a bleeding edge feature.

I would agree with the author's criticism if it was "futures are in the lang nursery and still not ready to use," rather than: Rust is bad, because I got nasty errors when using this work-in-progress library.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:100 days with Rust: a series of brick walls by steveklabnik on Sunday March 25, 2018 @12:53PM (#16673054)

Rust's futures leverage the type system to have extremely minimal overhead; many of those languages don't try to do that. That's where the difficulty comes in.

[ Parent | on HN ]