On 12-08-22 12:28 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote:
On 8/21/12 9:55 PM, Brian Anderson wrote:
Here are some ideas. Servo is probably a fertile area for contributing
to Rust since there are seemingly so many things that will eventually be
needed, but so far we've not been successful at enumerat
On 08/21/2012 10:33 AM, Reidar Sollid wrote:
Hi,
JavaZone 2012 have accepted my lightning talk on Rust, it is just 10 min
so it is not much time to present Rust
http://javazone.no/incogito10/events/JavaZone%202012/sessions#a8b2bb04-03f2-4e88-9663-8387692af0e0
I am deffently doing task, but I
On 12-08-23 3:48 PM, Brian Anderson wrote:
Differences
* Unsafe sublanguage - Rust gives you low level control when you need it
* Control over memory layout - Local heap/echange heap/stack
* Iterators - Rust uses higher-order functions instead of iterator objects
* Expressiveness - Rust code is
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Brian Anderson wrote:
>
> * No data races - there's no complex model describing when variables are
> between threads, no volatiles.
> * Global GC - Java has notorious stop-the-world GC behavior (though it is
> very good). Rust's GC is per-task so when one task is c
On 08/23/2012 02:31 PM, Graydon Hoare wrote:
IOW, sure, we always have more work to do than we can possibly do
ourselves. Extra hands very welcome.
Here are more ideas I pulled out of the issue tracker.
* Implement big integers - https://github.com/mozilla/rust/issues/33
* Add compiler-inse
On 8/23/12 2:31 PM, Graydon Hoare wrote:
The work that needs doing is integration and enhancement. I think,
ideally, we'd like to have a mode wherein it can be used _inline_ in
as a syntax extension, like include_c_decls!("foo.h") or such, as well
as in the "pre-generate the bindings" mode it c
As a C# developer, I definitely do *agree* with the above statement.
Simultaneously, Option doesn't solve all of our problems.
Putting aside whether this is a troll on Scala devs, considering the following:
http://beust.com/weblog/2012/08/19/a-note-on-null-pointers/
"...but don’t listen to peopl
The difference is that you know where you can get a null pointer, and where you
can't. If you wrap everything with Option, then you will be no better off. The
hope is that often you can avoid this (i.e., write pure code that cannot go
wrong, or isolate and deal with errors), and then you _will_
On 12-08-23 7:04 PM, Jeffery Olson wrote:
As a C# developer, I definitely do *agree* with the above statement.
Simultaneously, Option doesn't solve all of our problems.
Putting aside whether this is a troll on Scala devs, considering the following:
http://beust.com/weblog/2012/08/19/a-note-on-n
> Yes and no. I agree that it's not a panacea;
This was, pretty much, the only point I wanted to advance. Although we
still have void pointers in the form of FFI
And, to be fair, another major plank of the linked post was that
Option-style library APIs aren't ubiquitous even in Scala, and
certain
10 matches
Mail list logo
