|
|
|
|
|
|
by __jem
1462 days ago
|
|
|
> The specific exercise I have in mind is a lockless thread queue. < 20 lines in C .. ~200 lines in Rust. Why is this your exercise you have in mind though? This is such a bad argument. Like, yes, if you work at doublylinkedlist.com where your entire job is writing a new linked list implementation every day of the week, Rust might be a bad choice. But that's not what any kind of commercial enterprise actually looks like. If I saw you writing a lockless thread queue at work, I'd tell you to stop wasting time. |
|
|
That was an example I could point to where the code size difference between Rust and C or C++ is roughly 10x. I mentioned it to corroborate the claim that sometimes writing Rust is very verbose, on the order of ten times more.
My point was not that average commercial codebases are largely dominated my these types of structures. My point was that my experience with Rust has been that the development slowdown is much more than 5%, as the OP suggested.
>> If I saw you writing a lockless thread queue at work, I'd tell you to stop wasting time.
And that's one reason we don't work together ;)