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

[Dave Froble]

On 4/7/2022 3:03 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <t2n2b1$nvk$1 at dont-email.me>,
> Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2022 10:59 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
>>> In article <t2l9jp$b8i$1 at gioia.aioe.org>,
>>> chris  <chris-nospam at tridac.net> wrote:
>>>> On 04/06/22 01:25, Dan Cross wrote:
>>>> This sounds like medication to cure everyone from their sloppy
>>>> programming. The infantilisation of complex subjects, just to give the
>>>> lazy an easier time, while still getting the product built.
>>>> The answer to that is not languages that constrain movement, but
>>>> developing more professional skills and applying due diligence
>>>> and attention to detail to system design and implementation.
>>>>
>>>> I must be getting old, so what happened to pursuit of excellence
>>>> and more ?...
>>>
>>> Excellent practitioners curate their tools and select the ones
>>> that give them the best chance of maximizing the effectiveness
>>> of their work products.  Ego driven machismo and disdain for
>>> tooling that helps prevent defects is a sign of an amateurish
>>> attitude towards software development, not that of a
>>> professional, let alone an engineer.
>>
>> Perhaps "excellent practitioners" choose to stick with what they know and are
>> competent with so as to avoid mistakes with something "new and better".
>
> Maybe those practitioners aren't actually as excellent as they
> think they are.

Then again, maybe they are.

>> I have caught some flack from some here for choosing to not always declare
>> variables.  I feel that such a practice is safe, if care and tools to verify
>> some things are in use.  The opinions of others are just that, opinions, and
>> subjective.
>
> *shrug* How do your maintainers feel about that?

Once maintainers are familiar with company standards and practices, they are 
quite alright with the practice.

I just don't feel I should do the grunt work when I have a compiler to do it for 
me.  Then again, because of what I consider deficiencies in the compiler, I've 
had to develop tools to process compiler listings looking for issues.  Damn 
compiler has the info, it should do that work also.

Another factor is, many variables are declared, for various reasons.  Not so 
many are undeclared.

> It's odd to me that there are folks about being facile with
> tools and languages and hard-earned experience, yet they reject
> the very things that collective experience has taught the
> industry at large.  We know, for instance, that statically typed
> languages have fewer defects than dynamically typed languages,
> just as we know that declaring variables can serve documentary
> and pedagogical purposes.

"We know that?"

I'm not so sure about that.

Seems to me that a compiler that needs to figure out a few things might be more 
precise than one which just assumes what it's given.  But maybe that's just my 
prejudice.

>> I do find that the better the definition of the task, the fewer mistakes occur.
>
> Can't argue with that.
>
> 	- Dan C.
>


-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486