http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1gpyor/phoronix_d_language_still_showing_promise/

Andrei

Is it just me or has Rust completely displaced Go as the go-to 'why D when we have X' thing on the reddit?

It seems like not even a full year ago, Rust was rarely mentioned and all the versus hype was about Go. Will Rust fade away from D threads a year from now?

Adam D. Ruppe:

> Is it just me or has Rust completely displaced Go as the go-to 'why D when we have X' thing on the reddit?
>
> It seems like not even a full year ago, Rust was rarely mentioned and all the versus hype was about Go.

Go now is not advertised as a system language, and I think it has found its niche, sufficiently different from D. So there's much less reason for them to be discussed together.

One year ago Rust was less developed compared to now. And Rust is meant to be a low level system language (from what I am seeing lately, it seems Rust is gaining a niche at a level lower than D).

In threads where both Rust and D are discussed, I suggest everybody to not express bad opinions in general about Rust. If you want to criticize Rust then I suggest to write only on very specific features at a time.

Bye,
bearophile

The Rust comparisons should end. There is nothing to be gained from it.

On Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 17:51:11 UTC, w0rp wrote:
> The Rust comparisons should end. There is nothing to be gained from it.

It was not the D supporters on the Reddit discussion who brought
Rust into the mix.

Although I agree with you that trashing another language,
whatever it may be (maybe C++ is fair game), isn't a good way to
sell D.

But what should be done if someone says "why choose D over Rust"?
You can't just reply, "Oh, I guess you are right, Rust is better
... I am heading back to the D forum now!"

On Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 18:44:43 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
> On Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 17:51:11 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> The Rust comparisons should end. There is nothing to be gained from it.
>
> It was not the D supporters on the Reddit discussion who brought
> Rust into the mix.
>
> Although I agree with you that trashing another language,
> whatever it may be (maybe C++ is fair game), isn't a good way to
> sell D.
>
> But what should be done if someone says "why choose D over Rust"?
> You can't just reply, "Oh, I guess you are right, Rust is better
> ... I am heading back to the D forum now!"

Currently, I think they're discussing if it's possible to add mutable external iterators to Rust, which doesn't seem possible, because the strong memory safety Rust has chosen to operate within is quite restrictive. And if you can't have external iteration, you can't have generic algorithms, and no proper generic programming. I think that's a pretty good argument against Rust at the moment, but who knows, maybe they can figure it out. There's some info:
http://www.marshut.com/nxyuu/the-future-of-iterators-in-rust.html

But I wouldn't go around bashing Rust, it seems a very nice language.

On Thursday, June 20, 2013 21:05:46 TommiT wrote:
> Currently, I think they're discussing if it's possible to add mutable external iterators to Rust, which doesn't seem possible, because the strong memory safety Rust has chosen to operate within is quite restrictive. And if you can't have external iteration, you can't have generic algorithms, and no proper generic programming. I think that's a pretty good argument against Rust at the moment, but who knows, maybe they can figure it out. There's some info: http://www.marshut.com/nxyuu/the-future-of-iterators-in-rust.html
> 
> But I wouldn't go around bashing Rust, it seems a very nice language.

I haven't really looked into Rust, but from everything I've heard, it sounds like it's still very much in research and development mode, so I don't think that we can really have any clue where it'll be when it's actually ready for production use. It sounds like they have a lot of interesting ideas that they're trying out, which may or may not pan out, and we'll just have to wait and see where they end up.

- Jonathan M Davis

On 06/20/2013 12:05 PM, TommiT wrote:

> no proper generic programming. I think that's a
> pretty good argument against Rust at the moment, but who knows, maybe
> they can figure it out.

Interestingly, I have heard the exact same thing about Go.

> But I wouldn't go around bashing Rust, it seems a very nice language.

As far as I understand, I think it is the same with Go. :)

Ali

From version to another version a changes are very huge in Rust even in comparison with D.
Also 3 types of pointers scares me.
Version 1.0 promises be usable for wide public. Now on windows it's very slow and buggy.

On Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 20:47:19 UTC, Michael wrote:
> Also 3 types of pointers scares me.

This actually doesn't scare me because it is kinda useful for certain situations. However, I don't think it needs to be built into the language because library types can do the same kind of thing.