Hi, why y'all switching to Rust?
I mean real question. I used Rust for a year, before learning C.
It was pretty good but the compiler was driving me mad;
The syntax was a bit verbose.

Both are pretty fast as long as you don't use cargo.
It's not a bad concept (a memory safe lang) ut most codebases end up like :

unsafe {
dologic();
}

Do you think one day rust will be better than C?

We don't.

Rust is great. But its a lang you really have to get used to

Speed isn't the only reason to use it. It's also just so much more ergonomic and pleasant compared to C and C++ imo

@blindXfish Talk for yourself :P

@12bitfloat LMAO how dare you compare a programming language to C++, it's some garbage

@12bitfloat why is it ergonomic

@3dgoosee More modern syntax mostly. C++ has evolved to a point where the obvious syntax is probably wrong (think raw pointers, new/delete, etc.)

Rust is much newer so it doesn't have a lot of the cruft and baggage (yet :P)

@12bitfloat I see that completely different. Do you even what modern means? Modern means now and actual. Rust not more modern, it's literally just different. Trying to compete with something made as comfii possible for decades. Wrap and unwrap and?. C'mon.

@12bitfloat use C lol

@12bitfloat It already has a lot of cruft and baggage, mainly the archaic and obtuse syntax ;P

Rust vs C++ is like Ubuntu vs debian.

They are the fucking same. Just different philosophies.

Ubuntu is essentially debian unstable. Debian based, but not wanting to conform to the rigidity of debian release cycles.

Rust is one (of many) attempts to re-do C++ without adhering to it's two core principles... Keep already written code working (C++ is oh so much held back by this) and having zero cost abstractions.

Rust breaks the first by existing. It's new, doesn't have the baggage. The second one it breaks by forcing you to adopt what they say is secure.

Sure, there are a lot of things you, as a developer, can mess up, but it shouldn't be enforced by the language. Because in doing so, it's no longer zero cost. Bounds checking, for example, *does* have a runtime cost. (As do many other "security" measures.)

Contrary to popular belief, C++ *does* have these mechanisms. They are called debug layers, and, following the core principle, are opt-in. Don't pay for what you don't use.

@CoreFusionX CPP sucks anyways dude, like, getting a template error at 3am