Re:Implications of Rewriting a Browser Component in Rust
by chucksmash on Thursday February 28, 2019 @12:45PM
(#19273260)
Right.
No downvote, but GP post conflates "how code SHOULD be written" with "how existing code was written" in my opinion. Same with one of the earlier comments about "idiomatic C++ does bounds checking." I've seen plenty of NPEs in real, working Java.
If Mozilla isn't managing to write idiomatic C++, I don't hold out much hope for myself either.
> “Just follow these simple rules and you’ll avoid all issues”, a compiler should do that for you IMO.
This was one thing I really liked about Kotlin vs Java. It's nice that my IDE can do the work of generating getters/setters on a POJO for me, but it's not nice that the language requires me to fill my source code with that noise. To a first approximation, any task rote enough the computer could do it for me, it should not ask me to do.
See also: static languages that don't offer type inference.
No downvote, but GP post conflates "how code SHOULD be written" with "how existing code was written" in my opinion. Same with one of the earlier comments about "idiomatic C++ does bounds checking." I've seen plenty of NPEs in real, working Java.
If Mozilla isn't managing to write idiomatic C++, I don't hold out much hope for myself either.
> “Just follow these simple rules and you’ll avoid all issues”, a compiler should do that for you IMO.
This was one thing I really liked about Kotlin vs Java. It's nice that my IDE can do the work of generating getters/setters on a POJO for me, but it's not nice that the language requires me to fill my source code with that noise. To a first approximation, any task rote enough the computer could do it for me, it should not ask me to do.
See also: static languages that don't offer type inference.