this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
199 points (99.0% liked)

Programming

17418 readers
193 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hunger@programming.dev 29 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Read the proposal: Lifetimes annotations, the rust standard library (incl. basic types like Vec, ARc, ...), first class tuples, pattern matching, destructive moves, unsafe, it is all in there.

The proposal is really to bolt on Rust to the side of C++, with all the compatibility problems that brings by necessity.

[–] Traister101@lemmy.today 10 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Gonna need to start calling it C++++ at this point. So much extra shit in the standard library

[–] bruhduh@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

C# be like, am i a joke to you?

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 weeks ago

I'm not sure, C# wants to hear the response to this...

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Honestly, i prefer that over minimal standard libraries where you need dotzens of changing depencies for the simplest stuff.

[–] Traister101@lemmy.today 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Nah standard libraries are great but C++ has a lot of... cruft. Maybe don't plonk a lot of Rust in there despite all the positives

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago

Sure, not saying C++ isn't cluttered.

[–] hunger@programming.dev 1 points 3 weeks ago

Well, its a brand new standard library. A fresh start.

[–] zygo_histo_morpheus@programming.dev 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Ah ok just read the article and not the proposal. I'm surprised that they went that far but as I wrote I think that lifetime annotations are a good idea, hope the C++ people find a way to add them to the language that actually works well, which sounds like an incredibly difficult task.

[–] hunger@programming.dev 1 points 3 weeks ago

"They" did not go anywhere yet. This is a proposal, nothing more. It will take serious discussions over years to get this into C++.

Prominent figures already said they prefer safety profiles as a less intrusive and more C++ approach at conferences It will be fun to watch this and the other safety proposals going forward.