|
|
|
|
|
by jibal
103 days ago
|
|
I didn't miss that you totally changed the subject and now you're attacking a strawman. See Steve Klabnick's response to your other comment where you did this. Of course macros are good for encapsulation and abstraction, but that's a different subject--and note that the discussion was about Zig vs. Rust, and Zig has no macros so there's unencapsulated unsafe code all over the place. I won't respond further. |
|
> It would be perfectly possible to design a variant of Rust that gets you to 80-90% of Rust's usability, with the same safety, without macros.
i then present an api that i think relies on macros to expose a safe api
> Of course macros are good for encapsulation and abstraction, but that's a different subject.
no it's not. exposing safe abstractions is pretty much rust's raison d'ĂȘtre