| > Rust in comparison is minutes old and there's no evidence it will dominate the field of system programming in the future. This is true (for some values of minute). It is also why I was suggesting that C calling convention, HTTP etc, not Rust, would be the computing lingua franca. Now that I think of it, a few years ago TCP/IP would have been on the list but now with HTTP/3 it's not that certain any more. > Rust is Haskell with a different syntax though... This is quite bold claim, but if you have a rigorous proof beyond "all Turing complete languages are the same" I would be interested in seeing it. It's a pity you left. > ...makes it very hard to write simple linked lists. This is interesting in the light of the beginning of the sentence, because in Haskell linked list is the easiest data structure. Simple linked lists aren't always that simple though. There is a reason why they used to be a recurring technical interview question. > Again: this seems to me more promoting Rust than a discussion about memory safety Funny, to me this seems more about promoting JIT and garbage collection. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you admit that there are niches where those are a problem but memory safety is still useful. And so far there haven't been other serious language candidates for that niche. |