On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Daniel Micay <danielmi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Rust only gains efficiency from the type system, not any form of thread > safety that's not available to a garbage collected language. It's able > to send `Box<T>` data structures without performing a deep copy.
Which is the garbage collected language that provides this type of safety, along with a relatively functional view of the world (while still preferably being imperative at heart), reasonably fast generics, zero startup overhead (different from runtime overhead), macros, encouraging message passing but preferably supporting shared memory (sorry OCaml), a user community - oh, and interoperability with Rust code, since it's perfectly reasonable to want a fast core with slower addons? Today, if not for those things, I would pick a different language, because of rustc's slowness... but I'm sticking around. Of course, it doesn't mean that Rust has to compromise for my or anyone else's use cases, but I don't want to just go use another language if it can be avoided. _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
