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

[chris]

On 04/07/22 19:42, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article<t2n8va$1299$1 at gioia.aioe.org>,
> chris<chris-nospam at tridac.net>  wrote:
>> On 04/07/22 17:27, Dan Cross wrote:
>>>> 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
>>
>> Wrong again.
>
> What, precisely, is wrong here?
>
>> Mainly embedded work here and the first thing I
>> do with a new architecture and tool set is to examine the assembler
>> source to check for efficiency and sensible looking code. Even
>> ten years ago, the gcc compiler often produced a single line
>> of asm per C statement. That can be optimised by choices such
>> as do while / for next style, for example. You can argue against
>> that sort of thing, but you need to know your compiler to get the
>> best out of it.
>
> "It works with my compiler, so it's correct" used to get you
> flamed out of e.g. comp.lang.c.
>
>> That and being completely unambiguous in terms
>> of source code and not trying to outsmart the compiler :-)...
>
> It's funny that you are so fixated on compilers, but don't
> really focus much on the language.  The language is specified
> against an abstract virtual machine that's behavior is
> described in the language standard.  What your program does is,
> simply, not the same as what your hardware does.

Fixated on compilers ?, looks like projection to me :-).

>
> Like you, I often have to read assembly language listings to
> make sure I'm getting the output I expect.  But I'm not a
> cowboy about it.
>
> 	- Dan C.
>

Now you are arm waving and can't resist sly ad hom, suggesting
you have nothing valid to say and possibly insecure about the
merits of you favourite solution.

We are all different. You seem interested in language design,
whereas a compiler is just a tool in the box and part of a
much larger system framewwork for me. It either produces the code
I expect it to, or it fails. If you like rust, go for it, but
I see no value for the work done here and I don't feel the
need to knock it, as C has a rich history going back decades
and is a proven solution for a wide variety of different work...

Chris