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 logicchains on Monday June 05, 2023 @11:28AM (#36197657)
>less expressive in some ways, but fitting Rust way better, as basically a relaxation of a former restriction, rather than a new feature

They're not expressive enough to implement a monadic async library, as far as I'm aware, so they don't fulfill the role of proper HKTs in this context.

>minus `template`’s duck-typiness so you’d have to spell out what contract the container must adhere to.

Do you think it's consistent that the T in MyContainer<T> can be "duck typed" but not the MyContainer?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by estebank on Monday June 05, 2023 @11:36AM (#36197825)
In Rust neither is duck typed. For T you must specify the traits it must have. This makes compilation fail at definition, not at the point of incorrect usage.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Rust I wanted had no future by zozbot234 on Monday June 05, 2023 @12:16PM (#36198516)
> They're not expressive enough to implement a monadic async library, as far as I'm aware

AIUI you need GC in order to do that. There's a reason why Rust's async/await support needs compiler magic.

(I'd like to see standard interfaces for "pluggable" garbage-collected arenas in Rust, but this will need to wait until after Allocators/Storages get fully stabilized.)

[ Parent | on HN ]