Rust is C++ with nanny nags, and immature libraries, and a lot of improvements that 30+ years of C++ has made obvious today which weren’t so obvious back then.
The worst thing about Rust, from my perspective, is that it really seems to push programmers to “multithread all the things” because Rust offers the delusion that you can do that more safely now. Newsflash: all the things do not need to be multithreaded, there’s an awful lot of code that’s just peachy in a single threaded implementation, thank you very much, and multithreading it is just inviting trouble for no significant gains.
Mostly, a good library on C++ (Qt used to be one of those, but it’s started becoming annoying in the past few years) offers a lot of what Rust enforces at the language level. Stick to the library implementations and you’re safe. Color outside the lines when the library isn’t up to what you need - but do so carefully.
Newsflash: all the things do not need to be multithreaded, there’s an awful lot of code that’s just peachy in a single threaded implementation, thank you very much, and multithreading it is just inviting trouble for no significant gains.
I am waiting for your single-threaded fork of the Linux kernel.
Mostly, a good library on C++ (Qt used to be one of those, but it’s started becoming annoying in the past few years) offers a lot of what Rust enforces at the language level.
I like C++, but let’s not pretend that’s actually true. Qt is completely full of really unsafe APIs, most of them quite old by now. It certainly doesn’t offer anywhere close to any safety Rust provides.
Even something as innocent as passing a pointer to Qt’s javascript engine can end up in use after free, and the signal+slot stuff goes wrong real fast once you do need multi threading.
(which is not to single out Qt specifically, the STL has plenty of really stupid and unsafe APIs as well)
Rust would be better if the rust community wasn’t so up everyone’s ass about using rust.
Attacking the messenger because you don’t have any good argument against the message?
This is the Linux kernel project, one of the technically most conservative projects in the FLOSS community.
Rust is C++ with nanny nags, and immature libraries, and a lot of improvements that 30+ years of C++ has made obvious today which weren’t so obvious back then.
The worst thing about Rust, from my perspective, is that it really seems to push programmers to “multithread all the things” because Rust offers the delusion that you can do that more safely now. Newsflash: all the things do not need to be multithreaded, there’s an awful lot of code that’s just peachy in a single threaded implementation, thank you very much, and multithreading it is just inviting trouble for no significant gains.
Mostly, a good library on C++ (Qt used to be one of those, but it’s started becoming annoying in the past few years) offers a lot of what Rust enforces at the language level. Stick to the library implementations and you’re safe. Color outside the lines when the library isn’t up to what you need - but do so carefully.
I am waiting for your single-threaded fork of the Linux kernel.
I like C++, but let’s not pretend that’s actually true. Qt is completely full of really unsafe APIs, most of them quite old by now. It certainly doesn’t offer anywhere close to any safety Rust provides.
Even something as innocent as passing a pointer to Qt’s javascript engine can end up in use after free, and the signal+slot stuff goes wrong real fast once you do need multi threading.
(which is not to single out Qt specifically, the STL has plenty of really stupid and unsafe APIs as well)