News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Thoughts on replacement languages by kyllo on Saturday January 10, 2015 @08:30PM (#8868685)
Yes, a primary stated goal of Rust is "memory safety without garbage collection." I'm not aware of any other language for which this is a top priority.
Re:Thoughts on replacement languages by pcwalton on Saturday January 10, 2015 @08:33PM (#8868690)
It's because it's an extremely delicate balance (considering reference counting a form of GC, which it is): you have to carefully design the entire language around it in order to get the safe expressiveness that Rust provides. It'd be very hard to retrofit onto an existing design and match Rust's expressiveness.
Re:Thoughts on replacement languages by cpeterso on Sunday January 11, 2015 @01:44AM (#8869280)
How does Rust deal with reference cycles?
Re:Thoughts on replacement languages by steveklabnik on Sunday January 11, 2015 @09:24AM (#8870032)
By giving you enough tools that referencing counting isn't what you reach for. If you do need it, though, we use weak and strong pointers.