> There’s nothing intrinsic to rust that makes it better suited for “foundational components” over anywhere else in the stack.
Actually, there is, not having a GC means you can better reason about stack/heap memory usage. That matters for performance critical and things like embedded systems where you might not even use malloc() in c.
Re:Microsoft to Explore Using Rust
by arcticbull on Thursday July 18, 2019 @01:46PM
(#20472227)
I think I may not have phrased it well, I agree with you, it’s better than many other languages for low level software development. What I’m saying is there’s nothing that makes it worse for high-level software development.
Depends on how your mind works really... I know a lot of devs that cannot break out of C# class and enterprise app thinking. I happen to like JS for a lot of workflows. It really depends on mindset.
Been learning rust for a few months now and really enjoying it so far... waiting on the new async stuff to firm up a little before continuing.
Because explicit memory management has a higher cognitive overhead than implicit memory management, a GC-based language is more suitable higher up the stack.
Re:Microsoft to Explore Using Rust
by arcticbull on Thursday July 18, 2019 @02:55PM
(#20472889)
Rust memory management is in fact implicit. Sometimes you have to be explicit about lifetimes, but the two are not the same.
It’s not a language “for” anything per se, it’s ergonomic anywhere up the stack.