Rust 1.23 Lowers Rustc Memory Usage

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Rust 1.23 Lowers Rustc Memory Usage

For fans of Rust that didn't hear yet, Rust 1.23 was released this week as the newest stable version of this popular programming language focused on safety, speed, and concurrency...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Rust-1.23-Released

[gyscos]

This release may seem rather light, because most of the work of the past few months will only appear in the next (1.24) release - stay tuned!

[kaprikawn]

Rust fans are massive zealots, they will know what every release entails

[cl333r]

Rust fans are massive zealots, they will know what every release entails

Rust users != Rust fans.
I just dropped Rust after a 2 months trial for I realized it's too unproductive because of having to constantly fight the borrow checker, structure the code to the borrow checker's needs instead of yours and bad solutions to circular references, among other things.
What most people really want is not Rust, but a new C++ that wouldn't suck.
D doesn't cut it because it's still very dependent on garbage collection and Vala is a proxy for GObject and C.
Swift ain't good for it's not officially supported on windows.
So I'm moving on with C++11.
But I'm sure Rust will succeed, because just like Java for its time, it doesn't have competitors based on the latest possibilities achieved by modern compilers and has lots of hype.

[Steffo]

I just dropped Rust after a 2 months trial for I realized it's too unproductive because of having to constantly fight the borrow checker, structure the code to the borrow checker's needs instead of yours and bad solutions to circular references, among other things.

I think Rust will get easier to use with the time. Give it 3 - 5 years.

[log0]

...having to constantly fight the borrow checker, structure the code to the borrow checker's needs...

That was my experience too. Dropped it after a couple of days trying to write some nontrivial piece of code.

[cl333r]

I think Rust will get easier to use with the time. Give it 3 - 5 years.

Rust will certainly get better but these core issues can't be fixed because they and Rust's ownership are mutually exclusive, because they stem from Rust's core ownership rule of not having aliases to mutable references, e.g. you can't eat your cake and have it too.

For example, no matter how hard you think about putting the "right" lifetime parameters to make circular references compile - it won't work, you have to use (crappy) workarounds none of which are acceptable to (most I guess) seasoned C++ users. Here's a C++ dude freaking out about Rust's poor solutions at the end of 2016:

https://hackernoon.com/why-im-dropping-rust-fd1c32986c88

[Spazturtle]

To be fair it is probably hard for C and C++ guys to get into Rust because Rust requires you to write good code which is something C/C++ devs are unfamiliar with as it is simply not possible to write good code in C/C++. You can't just assume that you can convert a program to Rust by just changing the syntax, you need to change the whole structure of the program as Rust doesn't tolerate the bad structures that C/C++ do. There is a reason all C languages are banned by NATO countries for defence software and nobody in the civilian world uses any C lang for safety critical systems.

[Steffo]

To be fair it is probably hard for C and C++ guys to get into Rust because Rust requires you to write good code which is something C/C++ devs are unfamiliar with as it is simply not possible to write good code in C/C++. You can't just assume that you can convert a program to Rust by just changing the syntax, you need to change the whole structure of the program as Rust doesn't tolerate the bad structures that C/C++ do.

You can write good code in any language. I like what Qt makes with C++ possible, even before C++ 11. It feels a little bit like Java.

[garegin]

To be fair it is probably hard for C and C++ guys to get into Rust because Rust requires you to write good code which is something C/C++ devs are unfamiliar with as it is simply not possible to write good code in C/C++. You can't just assume that you can convert a program to Rust by just changing the syntax, you need to change the whole structure of the program as Rust doesn't tolerate the bad structures that C/C++ do. There is a reason all C languages are banned by NATO countries for defence software and nobody in the civilian world uses any C lang for safety critical systems.

I knew by saying stuff like that you’ll be trigerring them. The point is that every language has tradeoffs because of design goals. C and C++ are not so much tradeoffs as old technology that has been improved upon elsewhere. The problem with C is it’s own success. It’s way too entrenched. You need a major corporation to push in the industry, like with C# and Swift. Think about it, it took MS years to switch people over from VBScript to Powershell, even though it’s an instant winner. You have to convince people to relearn a language.