You know things are bad when a programming language is named after a type of often-unwanted corrosion (often associated with iron alloys) or a type of devastating plant fungus.
And what good are these "memory-safe" languages when there are so many that you won't be able to remember them? On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:12:48 -0400 Donald Allen <donaldcal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 March 2017 at 17:59, <narvu...@tutanota.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I just want to know the opinion of OpenBSD developpers about Rust > > and Go, I already know Ted's opinion. > > http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/thoughts-on-replacement-languages > > > > As they are both touted as memory safe, what do you think about > > them ? > > I've written some code in both and given up on both of them. I found > Rust difficult to learn, mostly because the documentation is just > awful, in my opinion. The principal writer, Klabnick, knows the > subject matter, but he just doesn't write well, again, in my opinion. > His first attempt at a Rust "Book" is currently being re-written. He > now has a co-author. I've looked at the second attempt, filed some PRs > to try to help, but finally threw up my hands when I was told that > something that is standard practice in C *and* is supported by their > software was not "idiomatic". They use that term a lot. It's a bit > like a certain political party in the US that talks about freedom a > lot. Then you find out that their definition of the word is "we want > you to be free to do what we want you to do". It's too bad the > documentation situation is at it is, because the language and its > compiler have real potential. > > Go is much better documented and, in general, feels more mature, more > finished. But it just felt uninspired to me and I felt a sense of > relief when I went back to C. C is far from perfect, but after all > these years, we know its warts, the compilers are solid, it's > extremely well documented (K&R, Harbison and Steele) and the libraries > are ..... well, you all know. > > When I don't need C's performance, I use Haskell, a brilliant language > and the Glasgow compiler and libraries are excellent. Hackage provides > a rich assortment of additional libraries. > > > > > Regards
