> Unfortunately, instead of actually fixing the underlying problem […] the
> ECMAScript committee seems to have gone with […] which is lighter syntax but
> still absurd.
Flaming other languages / committees is very much not the point of
this mailing list. Try to stay on topic and dispassionate.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Bardur Arantsson <s...@scientician.net> wrote:
> On 2013-11-13 21:41, Igor Bukanov wrote:
>> On 13 November 2013 20:41, Bardur Arantsson <s...@scientician.net> wrote:
>>
>>> In practice it's much more difficult to be *explicitly*
>>> async and it should just be delegated to the language/runtime. There are
>>> some things humans just aren't good at.
>>
>> I suspect Rust makes asynchronous programming significantly more
>> bearable. Programming in JS in that style is often painful due to the
>> noise of all those function() { } spread through the code and bugs
>> connected with accessing stuff that should only be ready later. Rust
>> nicely addresses that with shorter syntax for closures/macros and move
>> semantics.
>>
>> So an experiment of writing in asynchronous style in Rust and
>> comparing that with C++/JS/other languages would be very useful to
>> judge.
>>
>
> It's *not* a matter of just making the syntax "lighter". Asynchronous
> callbacks lead to "the pyramid of doom" (as Dave Herman puts it) of
> nested callback functions.
>
> Unfortunately, instead of actually fixing the underlying problem (which
> is the need for an explicit callback model in the first place), the
> ECMAScript committee seems to have gone with
>
> function foo*(...) {
> yield ....;
> }
>
> which is lighter syntax but still absurd. (To bear fair they also have
> extreme constraints of backward compatibility.)
>
> Python has also (to my great disappointment) gone this route, but there
> you can't even tell "from the outside" if a function is async-safe --
> it's not part of its interface syntactically, but it's of huge
> importance in practice.
>
> My overall point is: Why should the *programmer* be segregating
> functions into asynchronous and synchronous? We have computers and
> compilers which are more than capable than doing this for us at this point!
>
> Regards,
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rust-dev mailing list
> Rust-dev@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
