On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 16:17:02 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 15:16:31 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
Also, the list seems way too big. It's ok from a purist point
of view, to make the compiler nice and clean. But that's not a
good way to make a fast compiler.
This is why I won't bother investing any time in it for a few
more years at least. It may have really cool language features,
big development team and famous names behind it but in terms of
compiler maturity it is still a very long road to go until it
gets even to DMD capabilities.
I won't look at it again for a different reason. They're the
types that say "A monad is just a monoid in the category of
endofunctors, what's the problem?" but they're serious.
My last interaction with Rust was when I commented that adoption
would be hurt if they require an understanding of the memory
model just to get started, to which they responded more or less
that it's not a big deal. At that point I concluded the language
was lost. I can only imagine what it will look like in five years.
