|
|
|
|
|
|
by zengid
2538 days ago
|
|
|
I don't think you're alone in being put off by the complexity of the language. I think once you get over the hump things start to click. The mindset that has helped me is to say, "Ok, this syntax might sometimes look familiar, but this language is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from anything else I know, so I can't use my usual metaphors/analogies and need to use a clean slate". Then you can look at things like Ownership, Traits, and Pattern Matching and see how the whole language is built up around a few key ideas (with a lot of subtle variations) and then it might start to click. You need to give it a lot of time. Some of the ideas are really not familiar. I don't think Rust presents some of the ideas perfectly, but I can imagine that in 20 years there might be a whole slew of languages that borrowed ideas from rust and maybe make them appear more idiomatic. |
|
|
Rust itself borrows a lot from functional programming while also topping the story with lesser-known things like lifetimes, so no wonder it feels alien to a lot of people. In fact, the following:
> I can imagine that in 20 years there might be a whole slew of languages that borrowed ideas from rust
is actually already happening, except it's FP that's inspiring contemporary language designers (including Rust team).
To me personally even limited familiarity with Haskell probably helped a lot back when I started tinkering with Rust, it all felt more familiar to me than to average C or Python dev.