Comment by tcfhgj
9 hours ago
> Despite the usual complaints it’s alive and well and Rust will not replace it.
to some degree it is already being replaced:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj...
source: https://blog.google/security/rust-in-android-move-fast-fix-t...
Why does any mention of C++ nowadays turn into a Rust debate? These can coexist even in a single project via C ABI. Also, despite the vast syntax and semantic differences, an experienced dev will be able to apply most of their knowledge from one to the other.
My fault for mentioning Rust (perhaps I did it because it’s vaguely amusing watching Rust maximalists flex).
Just to add to the bait, I find CPP libraries much more terse and functional, Rust libs tend towards over complexity and feature flexing.
It's because crowing about Rust is like sending dick pics. I suspect it's the same part of the brain responsible with the same neural pathways stimulated.
>"Why does any mention of C++ nowadays turn into a Rust debate?"
Because for most developers language is a religion rather than just a tool.
If a tool had been replaced by a better tool, wouldn't it be natural to discuss that?
6 replies →
I dont think so.
The problem is the sunk cost fallacy.
1 reply →
> We adopted Rust for its security and are seeing a 1000x reduction in memory safety vulnerability density compared to Android’s C and C++ code.
This is a pretty poor post. It’s impossible to see what exactly they’re comparing but they seem to be comparing post LLM code to pre LLM code.
Don't distract, please.
Here you can find a general discussion of the article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45918616
Don’t tell me what to write.
Nevertheless, your feedback, despite its rudeness, backs up my criticism so thanks. Are you a Rust dev?