Rust my anus

What do you think about Rust? It's a language Mozilla is developing to write an experemental highly parallel browser: https://github.com/mozilla/servo

It aims to be a low-level language, but ensures memory safety and borrows havely from functional programming: there are closures, pattern matching and algebraic data types.  Looks very interesting.

Release notes from a recent version: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Doc-detailed-release-notes
Turorial: http://dl.rust-lang.org/doc/0.4/tutorial.html


impl<C: Compositor Copy Send> Engine<C> {
    fn run() {
        while self.handle_request(self.request_port.recv()) {
            // Go on...
        }
    }
    ...
}


               `
>implying

Java was also interesting on paper. I'll wait and see how this turns out. I've always had a soft spot for functional programming.

Camel cased types ... so e.g. the standard URL type is written Url.

Explicit self

why is it trying to be python

0.4 October 2012
class was removed in favor of combinations of struct, impl and trait
I'm starting to like this language

Anything good needs to be practical. Did they invent the language to solve *their* urgent needs? I don't think so, hence it will be yet another design-by-committee crap.

I still want a language where ``-'' is a valid identifier character - No language should prioritise simple mathematics over the unsurpassed readability of my-symbol.

>>7
try lisp

>>8
I know that. I want it everywhere else, too.

perl6 uses "-" for identifiers too.

.Flow, becoming rust. It was weird, but better than Yumi 2kki, in my humble opinion.

>>6
hence it will be yet another design-by-committee crap
Unlikely. Read their faq: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Doc-project-FAQ

Languages designed by committee have a poor track record. Design coherence is important.

There is a BDFL (Graydon Hoare).

Assuming you've programmed in any C-family language (C++, Java, JavaScript, C#, or PHP), Rust will feel familiar.
C-family language (C++, Java, JavaScript, C#, or PHP)

C family does not include C

pig disgusting mozilla crap

Assuming you've programmed in any C-family language (C++, Java, JavaScript, C#, or PHP), Rust will feel familiar.
So, more of the same pig-disgusting worse-is-better shit.

>>11
.flow is shit. Yume Nikki > Yume 2kki > Clannad > .flow

>>16
Thank you. Someone else agrees Clannad is down there.

fn mk_appender(suffix: ~str) -> fn@(~str) -> ~str {
    return fn@(s: ~str) -> ~str { s + suffix };
}

fn main() {
    let shout = mk_appender(~"!");
    io::println(shout(~"hey ho, let's go"));
}

Can someone tell me why the need for languages to use every fucking key on the keyboard as syntactic markers? Is everyone designing a new language secretly envious of J?

I'll concede spaces may not be the answer (Python), but why not just use {} everywhere, since it seems () is scary and reserved for Common Lisp.

Also is prefix notation pretty much dead now? Once I got used to it I kinda liked it.

>>16
Clannad has good characters. The Fujibayashi sisters and Tomoyo were pretty good.

The plot was fucking shit, though.

I've been following this for a while.

>>4
Explicit self types are used to control how self is referenced. That's not even relevant in Python is it?

>>5
That was the best call anyone has ever made in a language revision, I am certain of it.

>>6
The committee is wielding machetes. More has been removed than added since I've started following it and these people are disgustingly smart about what they're doing.

>>7
As mentioned previously, see Perl 6.

>>13
It's not very C-like. You could write it that way... but you won't.

On the other hand, it feels like what I wanted and never got out of C++: methods and parametrics are done in a way that doesn't compromise the simplicity that precedes them (structs, functions.) Even enums are exactly like C's (when they're not too busy getting algebraic on your ass, that is.)

>>15
You're talking about Go. No really, Go embraces it.

>>18
The sigils are needed to annotate the pointer types.

Braces and parens are disgusting to me (excepting S-exprs), I'd rather they used a syntax like OCaml's -> less parens than Python, virtually no braces or brackets, no significant whitespace yet reads just as well:

let mk_appender app = fun x -> x ^ app;;

let main =
    let shout = mk_appender "!" in
    print_endline (shout "hey ho, let's go");;

let () = main;;

That's the transliterated OCaml version. Haskell's $ may be available (if you've added it to the preprocessor) which could be used to eliminate the grouping parens. () at the end is the symbol for unit, like in Rust.

I'd be very happy to see this kind of syntax. Sadly Rust's inference isn't this good, and you'd have to put type annotations all over the place in addition to the referency stuff. It would look almost the same, but with fewer parens and no braces.

They lifted a lot from OCaml, but the syntax went through a filter and the semantics did as well in some spots.

from the people who brought us javascript

>>21
That was Brendan Eich, who is not working on Rust development. Rust was in development for about 3 years before Mozilla got involved.

Looks like APL

No thank you! I'll stick to Common Lispu.