this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
71 points (89.9% liked)

Programming

17331 readers
210 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is very over-exaggerated. A lot of people started with C or C++ as their first language.

That took place over two decades ago. There were no better alternatives back then. Times have changed.

Both of which are significantly harder than learning Rust.

This is simply not true. It's far simpler and less frustrating to work on either C or C++ for the simple reason that you can shoot yourself in the foot anywhere you'd like. In Rust, newbies have to alternative to endure the compiler enforcing its safety constraints anywhere they'd like. Rust is also a far more complex and extensive language that enforces memory safety rules that can and very often are very frustrating to handle by those who don't have a firm grasp on them.

[–] MajorHavoc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Agreed. I found learning C decades ago was a pain in the ass. And I found learning Rust last year was a huge pain in the ass.

[–] mmstick@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You're not making the strong case that you think you are. Quite the opposite. The ease of "shooting yourself in the foot" is precisely what makes it so difficult to learn. Segmentation faults and random memory corruption make it incredibly hard to get started with programming. The compiler typically providing no help at all for diagnosing where the memory handling flaws are. You need to learn how to use a debugger to get anywhere with fixing them. Many people give up when it gets too difficult to diagnose them

Rust's constraints are very clear and concise in comparison, with a helpful compiler that will teach you how to handle memory correctly. Cargo API documentation is also extensive in comparison to typical C or C++ documentation. I believe you're mistakenly assuming it's more difficult to work with than it really is. For example, imagine telling someone that pattern matching in Rust is more difficult than constructing unions and casting pointers in C. I've worked with a number of people over the years that had little experience in programming outside Rust. It's not that difficult.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You’re not making the strong case that you think you are. Quite the opposite. The ease of “shooting yourself in the foot” is precisely what makes it so difficult to learn. Segmentation faults and random memory corruption make it incredibly hard to get started with programming.

That's not the case, though. Some C and C++ compilers are already resilient and flexible enough to not get C and C++ to blow up in your face when you're doing unmentionable things to memory access. Some memory safety issues are only noticeable when running profilers and memory safety tools.

Keep in mind you are talking about someone taking their first steps in writing software. They are struggling to get stuff to work, and throwing curve balls at them is not going to help them get on their feet.

Also, I did not advocated for C or C++ as better options. My point is that Rust is an awful suggestion as a first language, which even the Rust community states. It also speaks volumes to Rust's unsuitability as a beginner programming language if the best attempt to refute that fact is to try to come up with worst alternatives that in the end aren't even worse at all.

Rust’s constraints are very clear and concise in comparison (...)

Irrelevant. The point is that Rust enforces constraints that other programming languages don't. If anyone is taking their first steps, not having to deal with them leads to a far more productive and enjoyable experience. It's absurd to talk about memory-safety and performance when the target audience doesn't even understand what memory is.

[–] mmstick@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Rust community is a very diverse group of people with many different opinions. It is not a universal truth that the Rust community believes Rust to be an awful first language. I've known plenty of people who started their careers with Rust. I started my career with Rust, too. The complaint with difficulty adapting to the borrow checker has been irrelevant since the 2021 edition of Rust. The borrow checker has become smarter about rearranging borrows and automatically tagging lifetimes in most cases. The remaining constraints that the compiler enforces are also hard requirements to learn when developing software in any other language. The same practices equally apply to all software. For example, mutating an array while iterating it in Python or JavaScript will lead to unexpected behavior. Python and JavaScript's lack of a proper type system causes a lot of software to explode at runtime when you think inputs are always X but suddenly in one case it happens to be Y.