Hacker News Reader

Comment by tester756 | Hacker News Reader

I'd pick Rust over "modern" C++

just because I don't have to deal with 15 compilers, 15 IDEs, 15 build systems, decades of language experiments, kind of compiler-flags driven development

View on HN

Give rust a few decades and it will get there.

Remember when python was simple? And you just had setuptools? Popularity breeds complexity and fragmentation.

Sure. In the meantime that's a few decades of better developer experience.

More like a few decades of extreme churn. Hey dude are you using Crate #43? No, thats dead on github. Try Crate #999. No dude that uses a diff async runtime. Try Crate #888. No dude, that has protest-ware on it and the boss complained. Try Crate #888. No dude, that has incompatible dependencies. Try Crate #456. No dude, that lib causes "fearless concurrency" deadlocks with async. Try crate #999. No dude, that has a gazillion macros and compilation times approach the heat-death of the universe. Try Crate #666...and the story goes on.

Surely C++ doesn't have this problem when using external libraries

Have an upvote for making my day :-).

The true real win of Rust. Knowing that you are incredibly likely to be able to compile it without any hoops. Random C/C++ project can still be a roll of the dice.

> you are incredibly likely to be able to compile it without any hoops

Nice.

Does that hold true for cross compiling to arm (Rpi specifically) and Android?

I ran into those issues when trying to build some old modding software for a game that was written in C++ (Corsix Mod Studio if anyone is wondering).

I was not able to figure out how to get it to build, maybe someday I'll fire up a VM running XP and whatever version of Visual Studio was popular in 2006 and try again.

Don't worry, the GNU people are looking to fix that.

also, know 50+ "best-use" subsets of C++.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com