On Wednesday, 27 April 2016 at 18:38:17 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2016 at 18:16:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
He gave very specific criticism, along with a code sample,
then made a prediction, followed by suggesting another
competing language that might do better. None of that is the
usual content-free fanboy "bashing." There is nothing wrong
with occasional criticism of the competition, as long as we
don't overdo it, either in frequency or by exaggerating.
No, judging a language by the appearance of its syntax *is*
fanboy bashing. BTW, some interesting points about Swift made
by a Rust designer http://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/5785.html.
Syntax matters. Both for the ease of programmers reading it and,
as we've seen with C++, the speed of the compiler.
I look at that code sample and I don't want to read code like
that. I have the same feeling when I see template-heavy C++
code. It is one of the primary reasons I use D, because it reads
very easily to me.
Is it just because I'm used to C-style code? Is it purely
aesthetic? I don't know, but there is a difference. Walter has
talked about an aesthetic quality to D that he tries to optimize,
and whatever it is, it comes through to me.
And whatever you may think of Suliman's and my opinion, I
guarantee that Rust's syntax is one of the main reasons it will
never take off, because most programmers have such preferences.
The Rust designers may not care: they may have chosen the syntax
that best suits their particular audience, just like Haskell, and
they don't want it to become more popular. But its syntax will
limit it.
