|
Bloody posted:idk what i'd use rust for. everything systemsy i do eventually boils down into some nasty unsafe poo poo which presumably (?) would wind up infecting everything and everything else is probably more pleasant to do in c# or similar i'm using it for ray casting. i think i might be better off just throwing that poo poo to a compute shader though tbh
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 20:36 |
|
|
# ? May 17, 2024 13:03 |
|
Slurps Mad Rips posted:the nice thing is that you'll rarely need it so most people dont need to use it unless they're writing data structures that have a structure that stores a const object.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 20:37 |
|
imo rust is never going to take off. people who know c/c++ and already have their knowledge base and the bazillion resources available to them will stick with it and for anything else you'd probably just use java/c#/js since it's most likely webdev. it doesn't help that it's also syntactically ugly as poo poo. this isn't a critique of it as a language but the space seems pretty jammed up right now and i really don't get what point it serves, especially when the stdlib is small as hell and doesn't give you much of anything to work with.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 20:40 |
|
its the same as every other p-lang. its goal is to not be java or c#, so by definition it cannot be good.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 20:42 |
|
if rust is a plang then that word has lost all meaning. i think it's actually in a decent position to take off, not to say that it's guaranteed to. it's aimed at a niche that very few languages are. currently that niche is filled by c/c++, and their age is showing a lot. c++ is so byzantine that no one really understands it. i get the sense that people are fed up with the complexity and undefined behavior that comes with it, and at this point the demands of backwards compatibility make it impossible to "fix". better to have a new language designed in this century without that baggage.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 21:04 |
|
HappyHippo posted:if rust is a plang then that word has lost all meaning actually it's a pee lang, because you should just flush it down the toilet
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 21:14 |
|
Shaggar posted:its the same as every other p-lang. its goal is to not be java or c#, so by definition it cannot be good.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 21:43 |
|
ive never used Delphi but it sounds like it was probably pretty good for its time.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 21:47 |
|
Yeah + there's no shortage of people who decry that it went away with no true replacement
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 21:48 |
|
Bloody posted:idk what i'd use rust for. everything systemsy i do eventually boils down into some nasty unsafe poo poo which presumably (?) would wind up infecting everything and everything else is probably more pleasant to do in c# or similar the idea is the nasty unsafe poo poo gets put in a few places behind 'unsafe' blocks where you can stare at them until you're sure you're not stomping all over your memory and the rest of your program is properly checked by the compiler also it's a lot nicer to write than c. c is so ugly.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 21:49 |
|
i want to gently caress and cum in java
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 22:03 |
|
better make sure your license for that is up to date. i hear larry's cracking down on that these days
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 22:23 |
|
i dunno i agree with everybody who isn't quite sure what niche rust fills. if you need a systems language you likely need the level of control that c gives you so you immediately toss out all the niceties rust gives you in order to accomplish that or you just... use c. but maybe i'm just a grumpy old programmer. none of the languages invented in the last 10 years or so have held any appeal to me. also i like c (i do not much like c++).
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 22:39 |
|
redleader posted:you also forgot erlang! erlang is great, currently influencing a upcoming distributed systems project into using it. well OTP is great. I'm not that into the whole multiple punctuation for similar things thing. but I haven't looked at the new hipster erlang enough to know if it's good.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:12 |
|
On the Erlang VM, Alpaca is the current hipste
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:18 |
|
leper khan posted:but I haven't looked at the new hipster erlang enough to know if it's good. elixir is pretty good. i feel like half the syntax changes it made were for the better, and the other half are stupid. mix is nice. MononcQc posted:On the Erlang VM, Alpaca is the current hipste I was about to make a joke about needing a third OTP language, so welp
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:20 |
|
Gazpacho posted:i bet you'd still be programming in delphi if it were supported I still use FreePascal
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:21 |
|
MononcQc posted:On the Erlang VM, Alpaca is the current hipste wow I'm out of the loop, I thought it was still phoenix/elixir. I talked up erlang in the office once and the guy that's really into languages used it as a segue to talk about lisp, him having used LFE at some point. I bet LFE could be the new hipste if they rebranded to a cute animal.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:23 |
|
leper khan posted:wow I'm out of the loop, I thought it was still phoenix/elixir. Phoenix is a web framework for Elixir! Alpaca used to be 'MLFE' but people kept calling it "milf" and so the guy renamed it afaict. Asymmetrikon posted:I was about to make a joke about needing a third OTP language, so welp Erlang, efene, Elixir, LFE, and Alpaca for the actively developed ones compiling to the VM. luerl and erlog are interpreters for lua and prolog running on the VM. There's a few defunct languages too like Reia and Joxa. MononcQc fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Dec 19, 2016 |
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:27 |
|
leftist heap posted:i want to gently caress and cum in java i hear they don't even let oracle employees gently caress it
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:40 |
|
delphi was good. it was vb but with a non-garbage language. it's a shame borland decided to set themselves on fire
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 00:03 |
|
I don't get why a systems language can't use malloc everywhere. Like, it's not good for embedded, but... on a real system, you can try rolling your own custom allocators but it's IME not really worth the effort compared to jemalloc. You still get the advantage of less memory usage, no GC pauses. And please stop whining about the semicolon thing, it's better than having the last semicolon mean nothing and having a bunch of people fighting over code style. Yeah yeah, return statements. Here. Have a language with worse syntax to make fun of: https://github.com/srh/starx/blob/master/starxlib/Ray.starx posted:
Optional trailing semicolon, everything is an expression "because that's better," even the stupid author couldn't put the semicolon consistently.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 00:41 |
|
And GHC can't even compile the version from 2010, it had to get tweaked to work.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 00:46 |
|
sarehu posted:I don't get why a systems language can't use malloc everywhere. memory/object pools. maybe rust doesn't need them but they're lifesavers in C I've written the occasional arena allocator too, they're stupid easy and blindingly fast
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:14 |
|
hackbunny posted:memory/object pools. maybe rust doesn't need them but they're lifesavers in C Well. Yeah. I've used them too. And the reason was, I didn't want to make a dependency outside libc. At RethinkDB when it was supposed to be a super fast memcache replacement (or whatever) we had a src/alloc folder and did the whole thing with poo poo like code:
It was faster than glibc malloc, but not measurably (or at least significantly) faster than tcmalloc to be worth the hassle. (And jemalloc did a better job of giving back pages or something so eventually we switched to that.)
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:35 |
|
Slurps Mad Rips posted:it bugs me that a "systems language" doesn't give me power over where i allocate objects from. same buddy
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:35 |
|
custom allocators seems bound to happen sooner or later, they have an placeholder feature marked unstable because they haven't committed to an api and syntax https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/boxed/constant.HEAP.html makes sense to focus on the functional parts first as long as they have a plan to fit it in later. a custom allocator is always going to be the kind of micro-optimization you should avoid in the start, right?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:09 |
|
if your language uses anything but c style syntax you're just reinventing the wheel to be a unique snowflake
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 05:28 |
|
BiohazrD posted:if your language uses anything but ml style syntax you're just reinventing the wheel to be a unique snowflake
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 05:31 |
|
BiohazrD posted:if your language uses anything but s-exprs you're just reinventing the wheel to be a unique snowflake
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 05:42 |
|
suffix posted:a custom allocator is always going to be the kind of micro-optimization you should avoid in the start, right? i wish i had builtins
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 05:43 |
|
suffix posted:a custom allocator is always going to be the kind of micro-optimization you should avoid in the start, right? unfortunately a lot of important stuff c or c++ is used for (like financial, gamedev, low latency, HPC, embedded, etc.) usually ends up requiring careful memory management and rust cant possibly hope to dethrone c++ or c unless it gives that level of control. yeah sure it's a micro-optimization if you're doing something that runs on a phone or desktop, but anything else is gonna be a pain if you dont let me say what is allocated where and when
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 06:39 |
|
BiohazrD posted:if your language uses anything but c style syntax you're just reinventing the wheel to be a unique snowflake lisp predates algol though Slurps Mad Rips posted:unfortunately a lot of important stuff c or c++ is used for (like financial, gamedev, low latency, HPC, embedded, etc.) usually ends up requiring careful memory management and rust cant possibly hope to dethrone c++ or c unless it gives that level of control. I wish I was doing something that required careful memory management. most non-engine gamedev stuff it just doesn't come up. I have a couple extra orders of magnitude of memory and cycles for almost everything I do. hell, most of the engine stuff I've done it hasn't been a huge deal. if object allocation is a bottleneck in your net code then lol you have problems. I guess I could try to get a better thermal profile, but no one (especially consumers) cares.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 08:13 |
|
Bloody posted:idk what i'd use rust for. everything systemsy i do eventually boils down into some nasty unsafe poo poo which presumably (?) would wind up infecting everything and everything else is probably more pleasant to do in c# or similar rust actually contains unsafety really nicely - it isn't viral, you provide runtime checks or out of band invariants to maintain safe interfaces around unsafe blocks or calls
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 14:24 |
|
Slurps Mad Rips posted:unfortunately a lot of important stuff c or c++ is used for (like financial, gamedev, low latency, HPC, embedded, etc.) usually ends up requiring careful memory management and rust cant possibly hope to dethrone c++ or c unless it gives that level of control. basically this, yeah it's a micro-optimization unless you actually need it and those people who do are already writing in c++
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 14:26 |
|
thing is no, no force on earth can get people to stop using c++ i think it's a bit naive of rust to think it might attract c++ users i mean, go thought it was like that too for a bit, until they realised the people picking up Go were mostly C, python and ruby people, the latter two just looking for static binaries and cheap performance
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 14:31 |
|
leper khan posted:lisp predates algol though lisp doesn't have syntax
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 14:33 |
|
tef posted:i kinda admire that Rc, Arc, etc are implemented inside of Rust, rather than being provided by it, but i'd rather *opt* in to uniqueness types, i'd rather stick everything on the heap and let the compiler elide what it can, using escape analysis. and at that point, start annotating what it can't handle, or what must explicitly be done. iirc Box currently gets special compiler treatment but there is an RFC to change that
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 15:43 |
|
tef posted:thing is no, no force on earth can get people to stop using c++ Rust was pretty much made by C++ users who now use it instead of C++, so I think it's a reasonable aspiration. Rust's stdlib is also modularized so you can use the bits that don't require the system allocator on their own, or plug in your own (single, global, implicit) allocator as and use everything. It's not the same as having an allocator argument in every container, but I think a custom lib with parametrized containers is more reasonable in Rust than some langs. Is there much besides Box that's hardwired in the language and requires allocation?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 16:09 |
|
|
# ? May 17, 2024 13:03 |
|
languages don't get popular because of their design they just get talked about in those terms
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 16:46 |