News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Haskell's Children by johnnycerberus on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @07:15AM (#24565565)
> Haskell is the science to Rust's engineering, IMO.

Wut? Rust doesn't have the purity and the capability to isolate side-effects that Haskell has. Rust is popular because of its ownership model that got into the mainstream. We still don't know what are the costs of it.

The only similarity between them is that both are statically typed, expression based languages (ex. Scala, Ruby, Wolfram, LISP) and moved the task of proving stuff from analysis tools to the programmer. But that doesn't mean that Haskell "is the science" behind anything. For what it's worth, Rust is closer to the ML (OCaml) family than Haskell, focusing on performance rather than purity. Though that is also debatable since it doesn't feature a GC and comes with zero-cost abstractions.

Rust has its very own merits. I'm eager to see how it will evolve and what hidden costs will be uncovered.

Re:Haskell's Children by pjmlp on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @07:19AM (#24565608)
For me the biggest merit Rust brings into the table is that affine types got out of the research lab, and now everyone is looking at ways to balance GC with affine types in most mainstream languages.
Re:Haskell's Children by johnnycerberus on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @09:02AM (#24566497)
> now everyone is looking at ways to balance GC with affine types in most mainstream languages.

Sounds interesting, do you have some links on this topic?

Re:Haskell's Children by scns on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @10:25AM (#24567437)
Niko Matsakis wrote his thesis in Scala IIRC. So Scala might have better shot at "the science behind Rust".
Re:Haskell's Children by Ar-Curunir on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @11:21AM (#24568125)
rustc was originally written in Ocaml. Rust just has lots of influences :)