▲ 86 ▼ Writing C++ is easy. (sh.itjust.works) submitted 3 years ago by MaliciousKebab@sh.itjust.works to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev 39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] cabbage@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) Sounds like Rust propaganda to me >:( permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JakeHimself@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) Tbf, you have to be pretty far with Rust to get to a point where Rust's compiler errors stop helping you (at least, as far as I've seen). After that, it's pretty much the same permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] philm@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago Yep use a little bit more deeply cascaded generic rust code with a lot of fancy trait-bounds and error messages will explode and be similar as C++ (though to be fair they are still likely way more helpful than C++ template based error messages). Really hope that the compiler/error devs will improve in this area permalink fedilink source parent [+] Boinketh@lemm.ee -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Beanie@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago 'it should pretty much never segfault' uh, isn't that the entire point of Rust? Unless you're counting failing a bounds check as a segfault permalink fedilink source parent [–] JakeHimself@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Would know, I've never had a runtime error in Rust /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Can't have a runtime error if you don't have a compiled binary *taps forehead* (For the record, I say this as someone who enjoys Rust) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JakeHimself@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) Tbf, you have to be pretty far with Rust to get to a point where Rust's compiler errors stop helping you (at least, as far as I've seen). After that, it's pretty much the same permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] philm@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago Yep use a little bit more deeply cascaded generic rust code with a lot of fancy trait-bounds and error messages will explode and be similar as C++ (though to be fair they are still likely way more helpful than C++ template based error messages). Really hope that the compiler/error devs will improve in this area permalink fedilink source parent [+] Boinketh@lemm.ee -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Beanie@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago 'it should pretty much never segfault' uh, isn't that the entire point of Rust? Unless you're counting failing a bounds check as a segfault permalink fedilink source parent [–] JakeHimself@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Would know, I've never had a runtime error in Rust /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Can't have a runtime error if you don't have a compiled binary *taps forehead* (For the record, I say this as someone who enjoys Rust) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] philm@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago Yep use a little bit more deeply cascaded generic rust code with a lot of fancy trait-bounds and error messages will explode and be similar as C++ (though to be fair they are still likely way more helpful than C++ template based error messages). Really hope that the compiler/error devs will improve in this area permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Boinketh@lemm.ee -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Beanie@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago 'it should pretty much never segfault' uh, isn't that the entire point of Rust? Unless you're counting failing a bounds check as a segfault permalink fedilink source parent [–] JakeHimself@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Would know, I've never had a runtime error in Rust /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Can't have a runtime error if you don't have a compiled binary *taps forehead* (For the record, I say this as someone who enjoys Rust) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Beanie@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago 'it should pretty much never segfault' uh, isn't that the entire point of Rust? Unless you're counting failing a bounds check as a segfault permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JakeHimself@programming.dev 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Would know, I've never had a runtime error in Rust /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Can't have a runtime error if you don't have a compiled binary *taps forehead* (For the record, I say this as someone who enjoys Rust) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) Can't have a runtime error if you don't have a compiled binary *taps forehead* (For the record, I say this as someone who enjoys Rust) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime. permalink fedilink source parent
