News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Rust I wanted had no future. Parent comment

Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by dist1ll on Monday June 05, 2023 @07:33AM (#36194911)
> That said, I still hate async with a passion, it makes the language more complex and not very elegant (i.e. function coloring)

Function coloring seems to come up a lot in these discussions, but I don't see a better way without providing a runtime. Could you propose an alternative approach to async, without sacrificing ability to write zero-overhead, high-performance bare metal systems?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by umanwizard on Monday June 05, 2023 @09:06AM (#36195638)
They could have simply not added async to the language. I was happily using rust before async and it was perfectly fine.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by hgomersall on Monday June 05, 2023 @10:19AM (#36196528)
So don't use it. Why object to those that do have a use case for it?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by ninkendo on Monday June 05, 2023 @10:34AM (#36196706)
Because it's possible the crate you want to use, uses it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by hgomersall on Monday June 05, 2023 @12:25PM (#36198698)
Or alternatively the crate you want to use doesn't exist.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by umanwizard on Monday June 05, 2023 @10:48AM (#36196928)
Because I have to work with other people (both coworkers and developers of library crates).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by ay on Monday June 05, 2023 @10:55AM (#36197040)
fragmentation of the library ecosystem.
[ Parent | on HN ]