I love this thing. Rust is the best language ever.
I love not being able to "mutate" (awesome new word for change/vary) variables by default! I really like that Rust makes you beg for permission every time you want to do anything useful.
I love how verbose the language is, it's so ergonomic. Imagine just typing out exactly what you mean instead of having the compiler interrogate you like a jealous girlfriend about where your pointer has been.
I really love begging the compiler to just work, especially when I want to implement a doubly linked list. I have to specify "unsafe" or have someone else do the coding for me (import a crate). It's like being born with a dildo up your ass by default and having to beg for it to be removed just so you can focus on what you're doing.
One of Rust's best features is how it throws away all the baggage of having a common and well-supported environment like C and C++. Instead MODULES. Modules modules modules. And crates. We will rewrite everything in Rust before we can resume what we're doing! I love how the language changes daily and is so unstable that I have to use an out of date compiler just to keep my project stable.
I love having SJWs and trannies in the core team tell me what to do. I love having to apologise for being white and justify my existence by adopting the latest fad mental illness, like being a multi-gender-representing bisexual otherkin.
Fuck you Ceniles. Rust is the future, get out of the way.
Background: I am into cuckoldry and love femdom, I like being told what to do.
I personally like to .unwrap().unwrap().unwrap() every single line of code, it's like enjoying a hot mug of s[]ylent for dinner after work with my wife's son.
Camden Wright
rent free
Levi Turner
>having the compiler interrogate you like a jealous girlfriend about where your pointer has been. Are rustfags just into being subbies
Incels and neets who don't have a real job program in rust
Austin Barnes
C++/C# for life.
Dylan Green
if you arent a shitty person you dont get bodied by cartoons. simple as
Thomas Sullivan
This is going to be a hard pill for the rust trannies to swallow, but it needs to be heard. Using Rust won't change the fact that you are incompetent. The hand holding Rust does WILL eventually have a bug in it that will bite us in the ass. There's no reason why the protection Rust has couldn't have been just a C++ extension.
Chase Butler
If you aren't a shitty person you don't get bodied by a programming language, simple as
Dominic Rodriguez
>If you aren't a shitty person you don't get bodied by a programming language, simple as
i'm OP and every single poster, i used 7000 proxies, i am NOT sorry.
Liam Gray
>If I decide what part of the code is safe and unsafe I will never have bugs! Because I totally know which part of the code is unsafe beforehand!
Rust is beyond retarded, write robust code.
Tyler Russell
>yeah I'm gonna switch to learning C++, this is too much more like you're too much of a brainlet to handle ownership
Christopher Brooks
trips confirm shill thread based
Oliver Lopez
Post "safe" rust code that isn't saw then >inb4 reference cycles Only possible in one very rare scenario and the language provides a type which avoids it and which is documented officially and it only causes a memory leak
Nicholas Morgan
Holy fucking shit is this real?
Brandon Watson
Do you guys like to be referred to with "she"?
Julian Watson
rust tells you if you wrote unsafe code and then you have to write an unsafe block and its up to you to verify that it works right. Thats why you are supposed to abstract things so that you can keep your unsafe parts relatively small and contained and verify each of them independently (making it safe to use those abstracted functions) so that you can safely construct large programs of safe code.
Asher Rogers
>rust tells you if you wrote unsafe code No, it complains when one of the autistic patterns is detected even though the code is perfectly safe. Doubly linked lists are detected are unsafe because your concept of safety is: SUFFICIENT but NOT NECESSARY. >you have to write an unsafe block and its up to you to verify that it works right You just contradicted your previous statement. If you are able to verify it worked right then it's "safe" by definition. >Thats why you are supposed to abstract things so that you can keep your unsafe parts relatively small and contained Except when your shitty safety model breaks down and you end up .unwrap().unwrap() your mut arc box's all the way to hell. Try making a game in Rust. You can't without hanging yourself. >so that you can safely construct large programs of safe code. You can do that perfectly fine in modern C++. We do that all the time at my company thanks to our code review process.
Aaron Harris
well yeah the point is that the compiler and static analysis can verify lots of things but not everything but some things is better than no things and some things its just impossible for the compiler to verify (e.g. ffi as an obvious one)
Logan Miller
>doubly linked lists See You can make them, you just have to use Weak
Leo Garcia
>calling .unwrap() on everything >not handling errors at all and instead just letting Rust kill the program Do you also just let your C programs segfault because you're too weak to make the computer do what you want?
