[Info-vax] Rust as a HS language, was: Re: Quiet?

[Dan Cross]

In article <t2n2u6$3jv$1 at gioia.aioe.org>,
chris  <chris-nospam at tridac.net> wrote:
>On 04/07/22 15:44, Dan Cross wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I wasn't suggesting that, but it takes years for all the issues
>>> to be resolved and a language to become mature. That and the
>>> language tends to be more fully documented formally. Sure, there
>>> are always issues, but C has been around for long enough now that
>>> most skilled users are to grips with the limitations and know
>>> which potentially dangerous edge cases to avoid...
>>
>> That's demonstrably not true.  C has become a tricky language,
>> one where most people who claim to be "skilled C programmers"
>> and who "know which potentially dangerous edge cases to avoid"
>> are either compiler writers, or deluding themselves.
>>
>> PS: Rust will be 12 years old this year, but dates back to 2006.
>>
>> 	- Dan C.
>>
>
>Sorry, but that's absolute tripe. With minor effort, can still
>build C code I wrote as far back as 1990, so it's about as
>standard plain vanilla as any language could be.

Sure, you can compile it.  That's the easy part.

>The basic idea of a language as close as possible to the bare
>metal, yet with enough capability for serious high level work,
>with layered design, is as close to an ideal language as
>anyone could wish for. Tricky language indeed ?, rofl...

The "C is close to the hardware" thing hasn't been true a long
time now.

https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3212479

	- Dan C.