Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dan_quixote 460 days ago
> Similar to C, but with much more help from the compiler with all sorts of things.

Is that not the problem rust was created to solve?

2 comments

Rust is more like C++ (though still not really) than like C. Rust is a complete re-imagination of what a systems language could be.
My conclusion is that C is not a good basis for what Rust is trying to do. The kind of reliability Rust is trying to provide with almost no runtime overhead requires a much more complex language than C.
... and C++ is a much more complex language than C.
True. Though there are plenty of people advocating for some small extensions to C to make it safe.
Indeed. I'm still not entirely sure why Rust was created when we have Ada, but if I had to guess it's mainly because Rust has slightly more advanced tricks for safe memory management, and to some degree because Rust has curly braces.
Ada doesn't attempt to statically exclude data races or aliasing bugs. Rust does. I guess you're calling that "slightly more advanced tricks for safe memory management", which sounds wildly inaccurate to me; those problems aren't usually considered "memory management" at all. Rust also has better error handling, a stronger static type system, a Turing-complete compile-time macro system, and much less verbose code.
Ada use was strongly tied to the US DoD, which put some people off it, for one.