Reading about the Rust language and finding a bunch of design decisions I disagree with.
1. Named values are by default immutable. In every other language* ‘const’ is a keyword to set that, but in Rust it’s the default and you have to specifically say ‘mut’ when you want it. This is the wrong default. My code is full of variables and has a handful of constants.
2. “Safety” features make it hard to get things done. I don’t want a ‘safe’ language where it’s hard or (supposedly) impossible to do the wrong thing. This typically will also limit me and get in the way and make me inefficient when I write code that’s just fine. I want a language where it’s easy to do the right thing.
3. Excessive use of closures. It makes me worry about closure capture rules. It has exctra keywords (`move`) to deal with closure capture rules. This may be an idiomatic thing that I can actually avoid most of the time in my own code if I want to.
4. Rust fails to do safe type promotion. Compare i32 to i64. That’s safe, but Rust won’t do it. (Java gets this right. Go gets this wrong too.)
On the plus side, Rust has some basic inheritance! I can define a partially implemented interface (trait) and override the default implementation if I want to. (Go lacks this sadly.) Rust has generics too! Another nice tool for writing once and using a bunch of ways. (Another Go shortcoming.) And macros! Way better than CPP too.
I think in all Rust might be a better language than Go, but I can’t guess the ecosystem and community growth patterns right now. Rust is much newer, so I think Go is in the lead. Maybe over the next year we’ll get a clearer trend line on this stuff.
Friday, June 12, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)