If Rust is like a better C++, why has it not picked up momentum in the work environment

If Rust is like a better C++, why has it not picked up momentum in the work environment.

Also would it be possible for someone to design an AAA video game engine with it?

Other urls found in this thread:

blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2016/06/13/gtk-4-0-is-not-gtk-4/
stackoverflow.com/questions/23653913/what-is-the-difference-between-the-adacore-gnat-version-and-the-standard-one
tkdocs.com/
dlang.org/spec/spec.html,
crystal-lang.org/docs/
myredditnudes.com/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>why has it not picked up momentum in the work environment.
Industry is very inert.
>Also would it be possible for someone to design an AAA video game engine with it?
Have been done in assembler, can be done in rust as well.

The language is still young, but it's slowly getting used by more places, just give it time.

You don't believe it will become another dead language that no one uses? I would like to learn it, but I want to be able to use it for work

no libraries

You can use C libraries or write your own binds

no C++ libraries

Due to name mangling you have to write "extern C" when you're writing a library in sepples, thus there's no difference.

D can link with C++ libraries

I just told you that there's no difference.

>Forced to jump through hoops
>No difference

Yes, we get it, sepples suck.

Within a certain probability it will be a stillborn language like 99.9% of them.

Qt is the only competent cross-platform GUI library and it's for C++.
>Gtk
Fuck off.

What's the problem with GTK?
Honestly wondering.

It's in the plans for 2017 to add easy bindings to C++.

Doubt it, the community is already pretty big and as a language it actually gives useful properties.

Also they're slowly integrating Rust component into Firefox, so I don't see it dying.

>If Rust is like a better C++, why has it not picked up momentum in the work environment.
Because it's worse than C++ in all the ways that count, such as not being backwards compatible with C, and not being established in the industry for 30 years. The compiler is slow, the additional safety checks make your program slow, and the community is full of toxic identity politics that instantly disqualify it from being considered by any corporation.

No standard
o

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

unproven + not ISO = high future risk

small user base + volatile specification + minuscule library collection = high current use costs

Also, you basically already have to be competent in C++ object lifetime management to have a prayer at using it effectively without feeling like the borrow checker isn't some cruel arbitrary overlord stopping your project from building.

>If Rust is like a better C++, why has it not picked up momentum in the work environment.
Because of inertia

1. Poor support for anything that's not Linux. It gives the end-user a hard time if you're not on a Linux machine.
2. It's also ugly if you're not on Linux
3. Bad ideas
blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2016/06/13/gtk-4-0-is-not-gtk-4/

>compiler updates also change semantics and syntax
A hard riddle indeed

>and the community is full of toxic identity politics that instantly disqualify it from being considered by any corporation.
this 1000000%

stop shilling this cuck language. maybe if you are too retarded to understand pointers this language is for you

Rust is dead though. It had a lot of hype behind it and then it failed to deliver on so many parts.

rust is infested with sjw's and lawyers, most poisonous community atm

rust is dead, finished. wait for the gc changes in d lang and migrate there.

Go > D >>>>>>>>>≥>>>>>> Rust

it has some nice ideas, and some terrible ones.
i dont think it will become more popular then c++, specially with standard actually getting updated now.

>garbage collection for AAA-games

nice try kevin

If you're making a game you're doing it in C++, there is no alternative to C++ for games

>It's also ugly if you're not on Linux
It's ugly for me even on Linux tbqh

What about Rust?

Is the only requirement an openGL library?

Unity

As someone who had the pleasure developing with GTK:

- there are like 5 people working on it, of which 3 are from red hat
- good luck with the people who want the 'old' look and feel back and start campaigns in their distro to unGNOME3ify the applications
- heavily underdocumented - in particular the newer components
- in the same spirits, Glade is shit and mostly outdated for the newer widgets
- the layout system sucks (most do, but GTKs layout system is completely inane)
- bindings: Good luck with all the incomplete bindings and their non-existent documentations (except for the Python one). You basically have to know how to develop GTK applications in C to use it in Vala - which is one major reason nobody but the elementary devs use it
- - because GTK is really only the high level widget set, creating custom widgets sucks
- retarded design decisions, e.g. combining buttons is a theme setting
- regarding themes, GTKs theming story sucks. According to the devs, the old system sucked and according to everyone else, good luck with Adwaita

Theres probably more, but that is all I remember right from the start. That said, it's probably still better than the enlightenment toolkit.

TL;DR: Qt completely destroys it in every aspect and if I can't have nice bindings in other languages it's a price I'm willing to pay. However, since Python bindings exist there is no reason it shouldn't work with Rust as well. Providing a complete binding to Qt is a matter of manpower.

>there are no pointers in Rust

I am interested to setup my next project with vala, but after reading this my stomach hurts. I have already notices, that the documentation is horrible. Would you recommend Qt instead?

The war on these languages is going to be the death of all of them. They're all backed by big companies.
Facebook backs D
Mozilla backs Rust
Google backs Go
But everyone's fighting to be the best language, and they are all constantly changing and so they are losing their supporters. Meanwhile, people who are presented these three options won't choose and decide to wait on it and keep using C++.

>Would you recommend Qt instead?
Yes.

It's not perfect; I don't like the way you'll need QTypes and how QtQuick is more and more priorized by the devs.
But at the end of the day and compared to the alternatives it wins hand down.
Most likely because developing a complete Widgetset is a number game, so it's good there is a complete team dedicated to creating Qt.

> tfw Ada/C

>my stomach hurts
Stop living in India

>But everyone's fighting to be the best language, and they are all constantly changing and so they are losing their supporters. Meanwhile, people who are presented these three options won't choose and decide to wait on it and keep using C++.

This, same with Swift and C#. Which is good, because it forces the C++ commit tea to finally put modules into it.

That said

some D faggot working and writing D tools at fecesbook != fecesbook backs D

Now if only there was a LLVM frontend, so I could enslave people with my unfree software.

thanks mate
take this (You) as a sign of friendship

You're not reading the thread, Rust is dead on arrival

pinned to my nipple

bonus: On linux, unless you do KDE development, don't use your repos version of QtCreator as it will be too old (and not stable). Use the Qt installer from their website and don't forget to skip the botnet part.

>according to Sup Forums
But let's be honest, when was Sup Forums even remotely right about things?

...

Sup Forums predicted Trumps finger movement?

>rust community is filled with sjws
Tell me more please.

I don't think gcc restricts that

>this thread
>enterprise programmers who are completely impotent to do anything without a library ecosystem
I could talk about Rust, but it would be wasted on idiots who cant understand the benefits without a thousand hand holding beginner books, thanks for reminding why I dont frequent Sup Forums for programming threads anymore

Seems like a miss and hit:
stackoverflow.com/questions/23653913/what-is-the-difference-between-the-adacore-gnat-version-and-the-standard-one

Ya,
fsf=outdated but free to use
Gpl version = almost new but gpl
Pro = new, free to use, but expensive

It's written by SJWs

Well no, if consumer electronics has taught us anything, it's that when lots of comparable things compete with one another, the one with the nicest name wins. Therefore, D is going to win.

Imagine explaining it to a manager:
>We want to use Go because Google does it, it has nothing to do with Pokemans
>We want to use Rust because blah, blah, blah, technical stuff...
>We want to use D because it's one language better than C

Clearly D wins.

>If Rust is like a better C++, why has it not picked up momentum in the work environment.

> Falling for the SJW nu-males propaganda about a "better cpp"

Don't be ridiculous, they're incapable of actually making anything. They only know how to destroy, that's why they need to parasite themselves onto existing movements.

>safety checks make your program slow
>they're statically ensured checks done at compile time

user, you don't know what you're talking about.

Tk.
>inb4 it looks like shit
No. Learn how to use it properly and it will look okay. Do NOT follow two decades old tutorials.

tkdocs.com/

Code written in Rust must be ten times faster to write and run ten times faster before it would be worth the enormous costs of moving to it.

>Also they're slowly integrating Rust component into Firefox, so I don't see it dying.

Firefox itself is dying.

Also who the fuck think Vec is a good name?

D will never happen though.

Just look at their document: dlang.org/spec/spec.html, compare to a younger language (write by 3~4 programers) like crystal: crystal-lang.org/docs/

One introduces all features of the language, one just simple rantings about garbage no beginner want to care.

Are you saying D's specification is it's downfall because it's not catering to babies first language, or the other way around?

>If Rust is like a better C++

Only a complete and utter retard would actually think this is true.

>competent library
Nice buzzword you have here.

I meant D documents are crap. Simple as that.

And since it's crap, beginners (to the language) will just give up trying to learn it.

And since no one will try to learn it, it will be forever remaining the creators' toy.

I keep hearing about D since 2008 or so, but have never heard it was used to create anything worthwhile.

I only skimmed it, but it seems quite good. Any non-novice programmer should be fine with it. It's not supposed to be an introduction book.

Is Rust worth learning? I've been hurt before. (Golang.)

It's an interesting language for sure, but I'd start with D.

No you don't

because if everyone moves to Rust, who is going to maintain C++ code?

I think the other user discouraged you enough when he answered "learn D (a dead language)" to the question "is Rust worth learning?", but repetita iuvant....
Don't fall for memes.

>they are all constantly changing
Go has maintained the 1.0 backwards compatibility guarantee for several years now, since the release.

Because of the autistic type system.

Firefox is on its way out, so is Rust. It's just another meme language.

Rust will be dead in less than a year. Don't bother.

Rust is the only new systems language with any real momentum behind it, the other one is Golang. Both are awesome but only Rust has some truly cool shit like memory safety and also generics.
I don't hate Go, in fact I might use it but if Go isn't good enough to do a fast rest API in, then fuck it I'll use rust.

Go hits the sweet spot between performance/productivity. I won't be surprise it will be next Java few years from today.

It's garbage since they put a specification where a reference should be.
Beginner mistake.

C++ has over 3 decades of active development and design. on top of that it has the most support out of any other language out there, including libraries and APIs.

You can't expect everyone to jump ship to the first trendy meme language that these SJW companies shit out.

Rust isn't really a systems language, they thought they could get away with advertising it that way after Go did the same thing with a similar set of features, but for low level you still need C/C++ as much as you ever did, that's never going to change

Go isn't a systems language, but a server language.
Can you explain what Rust is lacking in comparison to C/C++?

>Can you explain what Rust is lacking in comparison to C/C++?
ability to get easily around all the safety features that make it unusable for many purposes that people use c++ for

Qt is garbage. Gtk is much better. It has bindings from many languages and looks better than shitty Qt. Many large companies use gtk. For example, bloomberg.

D stands for DOA. It has an optional GC so you have to sift through the libraries to find out which ones are using it and try to use different libraries to thin down the runtime costs. What a joke.

Except it looks like shit on anything but Linux and breaks theming every other release.

Why would i NOT want to use gc?

A GC is completely fine for normal use. Retards just meme about it. For a real reason to not use a GC is if you need to meet hard, real time constraints.

>It has bindings from many languages
Of which most are incomplete or not documented.
> and looks better than shitty Qt.
Only on a unmodified, nonfunctional utopic GNOME desktop
>Many large companies cripple along with gtk.
Many more use Qt. More important, there is third party support. Best you get for GTK is indirect over Wx

Which is a way of saying he can't into Rust.

Rust's safety features are completely redundant, you should just write better code

t. fizzbuzz expert

It feels unstable as fuck. They keep adding new language features in minor versions and release a new one of those every freaking other month. They are supposed to be working on implementing a well thought-out stable spec and not be changing both the spec and the implementation all the time.

That's just embarrassing. How do big projects like Servo cope with their code breaking every couple of months when random parts of the language get changed around with no warning? Maybe if they weren't constantly trying to keep up with such an unstable language, they'd get something done.

Why are use rust when Ada does the same thing but better?

ADA is used by the army with their scary guns, no SJWs will touch it

Learning new toy languages only makes sense when you already know reasonably well C, C++, Java, Python and Fortran.

Because Go covers 99% of its uses cases in a much more pleasant manner. They also de-emphasized CSP-style concurrency, which was originally a strong point of Rust, so again it loses to Go.

Ttk

Unreal (hyper super AAA engine) has a slow as fuck GC.
Unity (less popular in AAA industry) has a slow as fuck GC.
Go has a fast as fuck realtime GC that you can tell to fuck off until such a time that you're comfortable with running mark and sweep on these niggers.

It's fine.