What is its purpose?

Replace C(++)

>>61417705
(spoiler: it won't)

>>61417685
Pajeet safe fast language.

Get rig of C/C++ build hell (unless you stick with good old makefile ofc) and eliminate mistakes of retard chads in your team just by choosing different language.

>>61417685
Promote accepting bigg CoCs for everyone

Someone made a language designed for autistic people.
The amount of pedantry that the borrow checker enforces is hilarious.

>>61418160
>he got stuck in the fighting the borrow checker phase
Brainlet.

>>61418166
Nah. I just find specifying that a member of a struct will probably live on as long as the struct a bit silly.

>>61417685
To be shilled on messageboards far and wide

>>61418150
The acronym CoC triggers me, i'd appreciate an acronym that does not have phallic connotations

>>61417685
to troll, plain and simple.
Otherwise, how do you explain this:

https://developers.slashdot.org/story/17/07/16/1715256/techcrunch-urges-developers-replace-c-code-with-rust

>>61418265
>let's replace a language that's causing us immeasurable damage with one that is just as capable and can prevent an entire class of errors
What is there to explain?

>>61418344
>just as capable
It actually isn't.
Or it wouldn't be able to eliminate any class of error.

>>61418344
C has not caused damage, morons have
Rust is not nearly as capable as C, its not even on the same planet anymore.

If they wanted something to replace C while maintaining its strengths but none of its weaknesses, Ada/spark would be the best choice. (Check out the 2012 standard, its awesome).

Rust is plain and simple: garbage.

>>61417685
The genocide of the white racev

>>61418344
Where is your proof that it is just as capable?

Where is your proof that it can absolutely prevent memory errors

This language has been around for a couple years, why are shills implying it can beat something that's been around for 40.

>>61418221
Introducing: DIC, the Delight-Inducing Conduct rules.

>>61418417
>hurr this language is old therefore it's more capable

seriously? and you browse a tech board?

>>61418380
>>just as capable
>It actually isn't.
>>61418400
>Rust is not nearly as capable as C, its not even on the same planet anymore.
>>61418417
>Where is your proof that it is just as capable?

Rust is definitely at least just as capable as C because it does let you write unsafe code if you so desire.
It doesn't "prevent" an entire class of errors but it's a big step towards minimizing them.

>>61418539
I think the point is that C survived 40 years of vetting while Rust is largely unproven

>>61417685
it's a language designed by autists for autists that has a syntax uglier than perl and a learning curve steeper than C++ & C combined

>>61418539
>>61418561
Neither of these are proofs

>>61418740
>Neither of these are proofs
Rust supports inline assembly and is therefore just as capable as C
https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.8.0/book/inline-assembly.html

>>61418768
>Rust supports not doing rust and therefore rust is as capable

hahahaha my sides -> orbit

>>61418903
Stupid questions receive stupid answers.
If you want someone to properly argue whether or not Rust can do everything C can then maybe you should try giving an example of a thing that Rust can't do.

>>61417685
Sane syntax for systems programming.

>>61417685
The Safe Space of programming languages

>>61418729
>it's a language designed by autists for autists
That's Idris

how is rust thread safe? are all types atomic or something?

>>61419035
Global runtime lock

>>61419002
unless there's some more itricate trick than going into unsafe, it doesn't allow to share objects mutably into multiple closures.

>>61419073
Are you now trying to argue that unsafe is not a part of Rust?

>>61419035
>thread safe
It guarantees that nothing is accessing a variable while it's being mutated, that's it.
You can still fuck other shit up.

>>61419094
I'm telling you that going into unsafe didn't convince rustc to allow it.
You may want to check your reading skills, since they are obviously lacking.

>>61419115
yeah im reading docs and theres nothing special about it, you still have to use mutexes, futures or message queus, just like in c/c++

>>61419119
>You may want to check your reading skills
That's a matter of perspective. The way I see it is that you asked for an "intricate trick" that doesn't involve unsafe, not one on top of unsafe.

Either way if you're using unsafe then you should be sharing pointers, not references.

>>61419010
Well it failed horribly at that, the syntax is uglier than APL or ATS.

>>61419312
*a more intricate trick* where does that say it should be without?
You should really check with a literate person

Why would I want to pass around pointers? I was mostly in unsafe because the entirety of x11 seems to be unsafe for some odd reason

>>61417705
https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/16/death-to-c/
>>61417685
https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/16/death-to-c/

>>61419542
>where does that say it should be without
Where does it say that it should be with?

>Why would I want to pass around pointers
Because you're trying to do something that's unsafe.
You tried to use safe constructs in an unsafe way and now you're complaining that it doesn't work.
Unsafe doesn't magically remove all restrictions, it just gives you low level tools to work with.

>>61418344
Call me when you can write safe code in rust (a la framac).

>>61417685
Where can I get a Rust crankset?

>>61419602
>Unsafe doesn't magically remove all restrictions, it just gives you low level tools to work with.
But that's retarded.
It literally says "unsafe", not "pointerized"

Why would I want to break compatibility with existing frameworks because I need to go into unsafe to convince the borrow checker it's being stupid?

>>61419756
>convince the borrow checker it's being stupid
You are obviously trying to do something stupid.
Having multiple mutable references is unsafe.
If you really want them then you can take a reference, cast it to a pointer, and dereference it as a mut reference.

>>61419494
Better than C though.

>>61419073
No need for unsafe just use RefCell<T>

Rust is Java for Ctards

>>61421089
Analogies are comparisons for Sophists.

I want to learn Rust coming from C++ and Python
Is it worth it?

>>61422624
It's anyone's guess whether it'll actually take off.

>>61419142
>you still have to use mutexes, futures or message queus

No shit.

What Rust does is doesn't let you NOT use those. It prevents data races

>>61417685
Puts academia circlejerk type system to low level or high performance programming