Hacker News Reader

Rust is more complex than C, yes, but as someone who has used both professionally, it is not even close to being as complex as C++. In fact it is closer in complexity to C than to C++.

View on HN

Perhaps you can help guide a C expert but C++ avoider (and super-avoider of Rust, so far): If C is 1 in complexity, where does C++ and Rust fall. By 'complexity' here I mean: the ability to keep the Entire Language in your head at the same time. C, although it does have complex corners, is -- mostly -- not overly complicated. (As you can probably tell, I prefer assembly, because it is the least complicated. You can build your own abstractions up, which is the proper way to use assembly). Thank you for any insight; I'm not wedded to my views when shown a Better Way.

If C is 1 and C++ is 100 I would say Rust is like 25.

If your favorite language is assembly and C is too high-level for you then you are probably going to dislike Rust (and Java, Python, and every other modern language).

Contrasting the sibling reply from umanwizard, I'll say Rust is 75, but 95% of the time, it's 40 or under. There's a pretty obvious cliff, so you can avoid or detect it unless you need to do something advanced. Unlike C++, you don't just "run into" the complexity unknowingly, as if it's hiding around every corner. Normal Rust is very well crafted such that all the gears turn together, but there are many rough edges (async, traits, lifetimes) that still need a lot of refinement. As the sibling reply says, I doubt you'll like Rust. I don't like Rust when it's in 75-complexity mode either, but I think Rust is a great example of an evolving language, and the complexity should decrease gradually. Moreover, Rust has/will inspire other languages that may be more palatable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com