Rust, C or C++

My background is essentially Python and SQL, but I want to learn a language that's lower-level to get acquainted with systems programming and high performance applications.

Should I go with C, C++ or Rust? I have absolutely no knowledge of that field as a whole.
Also, how useful is it to learn asm?

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Rust and C++ is the meta. C if you have to interface with legacy codebases.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    rust because there seems to be no end to crypto pajeets in sight and rust is to crypto what java is to tradfi

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      English please.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Put the peace pipe down and try again.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    HTML

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    C has a small syntax, just learn it but don't bother building anything significant.

    Learn rust if you want a systems language that will force you to write good code

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >C has a small syntax, just learn it but don't bother building anything significant.
      >Learn rust if you want a systems language that will force you to write good code
      This. As much as I like C++ it ain't worth it man, dealing with makefiles, cmake, half baked package managers or making your own system with git submodules and downloading and patching 3rd party libraries then having to deal with building for other platforms, just not worth it man. C++ is a beautiful language that is let down by the environment around it.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you don't know C you are not a programmer. I don't care which language you prefer to use for your software, knowing C is mandatory.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      is a cultist. Don't listen to him.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Every other language is based on C
        >But-
        Nobody has ever used memelangs like Lisp for anything meaningful

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >lisp
          >memelang
          Learning lisp will make you an infinitely better programmer than learning C or python or whatever else

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I think that's the cultist. Even I that I'm a cnile can see the appeal and basedness of lisp. It's really fricking good.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Every other language is based on C
            >But-
            Nobody has ever used memelangs like Lisp for anything meaningful

            You're implying that you can't learn both. In fact it would help to learn both.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You can learn as many languages as you want. However, if C is not one of them then you're not a programmer, just a code monkey

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        He definitely sounds like a cultist, but if you learn C you will learn truest lower-level, if you don't count assembly of course. I'm currently doing K&R C book and it's pretty awesome. If you already grasp python and SQL you'll do fine, just be ready to learn a few new ways to do stuff. My background is C#, C++ and Java btw.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I already "learned" C in school and with opengl gamedev projects. But there were zero C jobs available.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Just learn assembly. C is a waste of time.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >K&R
          Why would you want to learn using an old standard thats like learning C/C++ instead of modern C++ which is a real problem and one of the reasons it gets alot of hate.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >thinks it's about learning the standard
            Millenials and anything new are lacking in braincells.

            Got it. Learn C++ first then "dip" into C when needed.

            Should be the other way around.
            I'm better than all of you btw.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Its about learning the correct way of doing things in the current year but of course grandpa in his senility cant think straight anymore.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        C will show you what the abstractions in other languages are doing under the hood. Very useful for learning, but not a great language to actually write software in unless you like tedium. I'd go with rust, then try C or C++ if it's too hard for you.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's not true at all. C can't even model closures, let alone something as complex as async in C++/Rust.

          C is not a low level language. If you want to understand what C++/Rust do under the hood, you have to look into their assembly output.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >C is not a low level language.
            Repeat after me:
            Your computer is a fast PDP-11.
            C is portable assembly.
            If you don't understand, keep repeating it until you do.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Forced meme

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >C is not a low level language
            any definition of "low level language" under which this statement is true is a definition under which x86 asm is also not a "low level language", hence a useless definition

            moronic Black person(s)

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >C is not a low level language
            any definition of "low level language" under which this statement is true is a definition under which x86 asm is also not a "low level language", hence a useless definition

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            "Low level language" means you have control over everything the CPU can do. C has pointer arithmetic but it does not have anything like LIDT and CPUID in x86, for example. You can't have any compiler or optimizer that generates those instructions because there is nothing that corresponds to them in C.
            >under which x86 asm is also not a "low level language", hence a useless definition
            PDP-11 machine code was always run by an interpreter written in microcode and it's still considered a low level language.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            x86 asm is not a low level language either
            you can't control register renaming, speculative execution and a dozen other features of your x86 cpu in asm either

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            These are things that CPU controls by itself. The interface that CPU provides is its instruction set and assembly gives you full control over the machine code you generate. That's what low level language means. High level languages create abstractions that do not map directly to machine code. That's what makes them high level.

            Go back to college.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            you can update microcode in your x86 cpu, so there is an interface to even lower level features than what it provides via machine code
            machine code also provides abstraction that do not map directly to microcode, such as pretty much the whole machinery around ilp - in machine code, you get the illusion of your instructions being executed in sequence when in fact, they can be reordered and executed in parallel
            seems to me that you need to go back to college, preferably one that will teach you at least basics of maths because, the definition you use to separate asm from c is the same one you can use to separate asm from microcode

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >the definition you use to separate asm from c is the same one you can use to separate asm from microcode
            None of that is specific to C though. Anything that describes C also describes any compiled language. That's why C isn't a "low level" language and assembly is.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >c isn't a low level language because it abstracts over an interface the cpu provides
            >asm is a low level language despite it abstracting over a different interface the cpu provides
            extremely useful and nonschizo definition, i'm truly impressed

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >machine code also provides abstraction that do not map directly to microcode
            Doesn't matter. Assembly maps directly to the CPU's machine code and that's what makes it low level.

            >seems to me that you need to go back to college, preferably one that will teach you at least basics of maths because, the definition you use to separate asm from c is the same one you can use to separate asm from microcode
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-level_programming_language

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >it is so because wikipedia says so, referencing... 2 sources in total
            lmao
            also that definition is equally as bad as yours
            >little to no abstraction over isa
            how much is "little to no"?
            might as well just go the whole way and say "low level language is machine code" and accept that nobody will use your definition, people will still continue to call various other languages "low level" depending on context
            because the whole concept is simply not useful

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Anyone who's opinion is worth anything will use proper definition of low level language. Simple as that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            anyone whose opinion is worth anything will indeed use proper definition for the concept you're calling low level language - machine code

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >this shit again
            Your instructions executing in sequence is not an illusion when the CPU insures that the results are what they would be if run strictly in sequence.

            >the definition you use to separate asm from c is the same one you can use to separate asm from microcode
            And the accepted definition of low level language in EE is a language which (mostly) maps 1:1 to the Instruction Set Architecture. That the ISA itself may be an abstraction in places does NOT change this.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Your instructions executing in sequence is not an illusion
            tell that to all those pesky speculative execution exploits from the past decade
            >low level language in EE
            you're probably thinking of CE, the only languages i've heard EEs talking about were spice and matlab, kek
            even in CE, i've never heard anyone competent use the redundant definition for machine code
            low level vs high level is just some vague distinction that changes depending on context, it's not a useful concept
            >(mostly) maps 1:1
            quantify mostly and list some other languages

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >You can't have any compiler or optimizer that generates those instructions because there is nothing that corresponds to them in C.
            invalid reasoning
            how does my compiler generate vectorized code when C doesn't have anything that corresponds to those instructions?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's an optimization. The compiler looks at the overall effect of your code and optimizes it to use vectors. There are instructions in x86 that are not optimizations of anything in C and have no relationship to anything in C. Paging is another example.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >C can't even model closures
            It's just a struct plus a function innit?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And how are you going to emulate the stack using a struct?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      have a nice day nocoder troony

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      C, then C++. Rust only if you wear programmer socks.

      Unironically this. The seethe from people who don't know C and hate it is because deep down they know the truth. Their training is incomplete.

      C will show you what the abstractions in other languages are doing under the hood. Very useful for learning, but not a great language to actually write software in unless you like tedium. I'd go with rust, then try C or C++ if it's too hard for you.

      >C will show you what the abstractions in other languages are doing under the hood.
      Yep.

      >not a great language to actually write software in unless you like tedium.
      I disagree. It depends of course on the software. Some things I definitely would not want to have to write in C. But other things fall together nicely in C.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    learn C because it's very simple and easy to learn. Then learn C++ (it's basically C with bloat), and decide for yourself whether you like one or the other.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Zig
    Learn ASM on a PIC or Atmel MCU

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Is asm actually useful? Isn't it extremely inconvenient since you need to "relearn" new syntax for every new architecture?

      Rust is protests lang, you should learn what they are protesting for first before you can understand it

      Is it the same for stuff like Carbon or Zig?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Is asm actually useful?
        no, only if you are writing a compiler, operating system (most critical parts).

        but good to know it also for debugging and for gasping how things work under the hood

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Learn C to get the basics and then decide between C++ or Rust.
        C++ has more jobs and is more popular. Rust is generally a better language and is significantly nicer to write stuff in, aka comfy. Especially hobby stuff.
        Asm is not very useful at all, except for rare cases where you absolutely need to use it.

        Carbon is a language made to help you cope with huge C++ legacy codebases. You definitely do not need it.
        Zig is a meme language that gets shilled super hard on IQfy. If you look into Zig threads you will quickly realize literally no one ever writes anything in it and the only thing ziggers are interested in is starting language wars. This language still has huge bug that miscompiles normal looking pieces of code. You shouldn't waste your time with it.

        In general look at technical merit in the posts. If someone is making post that is overly emotional, sexual or political, they are just a nocoder and their post can be safety dismissed.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Very useful and good to know even if you're reaching for C (though I'm used to working in scenarios where you count every cycle and often just write ASM).

        The concepts you learn help with robotics, hardware design, or even writing an emulator.

        Also, it doesn't change much across MCUs and most of the concepts are the same (e.g: skip if bit is set, interrupt routine, etc.).

        Different MCU families (AVR, PIC) are more like different libraries than different languages.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Is it same for stuff like Carbon and Zig?
        Not sure about Carbon, but for Zig, it's kind of... Zig itself is trying to be lower level than C but still above assembly. However, you shouldn't spend much time on Zig for now unless you are heavily experienced in low level stuff

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Rust programmer here. While I would strongly encourage you to learn Rust at a later date if you plan on actually writing systems code, if you are just starting to learn systems programming, it is mandatory that you learn C. C is the lingua franca of systems programming. If you know Rust but not C, you are not going to be effective at using unsafe Rust where it's needed, because you have not learned the footguns from C. You may also not understand all of the abstractions that Rust is providing you to make things easier.

    All good Rust programmers have a background in C. And it lets us appreciate our language more knowing how and why it does what it does.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >our language
      look at how you type you fricking cultist
      it's a tool

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They're not really the same, anyway. Rust's unsafe is much less reliable than C, because C's undefined behavior is clearly documented. There are several things you can do in C, but can't in Rust. For a concrete example, it's impossible to implement a reliable equivalent to memmove (memcpy, but with support for overlapping memory) in unsafe Rust, because aliasing memory is undefined behavior. Rust's unsafe is like trying to balance a stick in the palm of your hand with a blindfold on.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Rust's unsafe is much less reliable than C, because C's undefined behavior is clearly documented.
        What undefined behavior in Rust is not well documented but is documented in C?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >For a concrete example, it's impossible to implement a reliable equivalent to memmove (memcpy, but with support for overlapping memory) in unsafe Rust, because aliasing memory is undefined behavior.
        https://gitlab.redox-os.org/redox-os/kernel/-/blob/master/src/externs.rs#L53
        ?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Rust is protests lang, you should learn what they are protesting for first before you can understand it

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    depends who you are:

    * troony or commie -> rust
    * caveman or idiot -> C
    * based developer -> C++
    * ok developer but with limited mental capability or patience to dig around minefields -> Lisp, Haskel and so on
    * slightly mentally moronic -> python

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Isn't better to learn C to understand how things works, then use the best language for the job.
      >slightly mentally moronic -> python
      Yes, if you don't understand how things work, but if you understand, then you can use python or any high level language to do the job, instead of writing everything from scratch (if you don't need to.)

      In the end they're just programming languages, they're tools to serve you, not the opposite.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Isn't better to learn C to understand how things works, then use the best language for the job.
      >slightly mentally moronic -> python
      Yes, if you don't understand how things work, but if you understand, then you can use python or any high level language to do the job, instead of writing everything from scratch (if you don't need to.)

      In the end they're just programming languages, they're tools to serve you, not the opposite.

      All top EECS universities in the world have switched to Python for their introductory programming courses. It now goes Python -> C -> other stuff. It used to be Lisp by the way, not C
      Except at my uni where for some fricking reason they teach OCaml to freshmen but that's an outlier

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Unemployed moron

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >unemplyed
        C++ is the most employed language here, idiot

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          second most after C

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >tfw dogshit enterprise languages like Java and C# or JS web garbage is infinitely more popular and will always remain more popular than interesting languages
    Feels bad man
    I wish there were Lisp jobs

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      what do you like in Lisp, compared to C++?
      or to Haskell?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I wish there were Lisp jobs
      you don't
      lisp is a personal language, not something anyone should use for code that ought to be worked on by others
      i consider it a wonder of software engineering that emacs managed to not invent 648 sexpr dsls for every little thing, as is usual with lisp projects

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >lisp is a personal language, not something anyone should use for code that ought to be worked on by others
        >i consider it a wonder of software engineering that emacs managed to not invent 648 sexpr dsls for every little thing, as is usual with lisp projects
        clue me in.
        why not invent the 600 something things, and just document them?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          because troglodytes won't be able to use your dsl
          you want troglodytes to be able to work on the project too because otherwise you'd drown in work
          and non-troglodytes will have to wade through a dozen or so layers of abstraction that might not suit how they think
          everyone has a different way of thinking and your dsl forces others to do it your way, the result, more often than not, is those others inventing their own dsl instead of using yours
          there's not many programmers who can bite the bullet and do it your way when writing a dsl is as easy as it is in lisp, it takes far more discipline to not shit up the codebase even if (especially if) you have capable programmers

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      There are some clojure jobs

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You should pick up C, and then figure out where you want to go from there. The truth is that C is the universal tongue that every other language speaks, including Rust and C++. You will inevitably be interfacing with C code in either of those languages. You'll also be going through C when you interface with C++.

    Most of my experience is in C, and I'll tell you that it's really not a very nice language to write. But I've tried Rust before, and it's got many issues of its own. For one, the documentation is extremely lackluster. The Reference is highly incomplete, it's even missing a description of the ownership system. Learning the language was extremely frustrating, because I didn't want to sit through the slog that is the Rust Book, and that one isn't even a complete description of the language either.

    I think it's also too idealistic. Part of my background is in games, and games are full of self-referential data, which Rust's ownership semantics make totally illegal. The solution to this? People allocate their own pools of memory and keep references to elements in that pool in the form of indices. Sounds familiar? That's just what a pointer is. To be fair, though, you can't circumvent Rust's overflow protection that way, and that's probably the worst class of memory bug you can have in your program. (The above was also a problem when I tried writing a build system, the DAG representation required the same vector-and-indices trick.)

    Finally, Rust's tooling is frustrating. The incremental compilation times are horrendous on non-trivial codebases. I recall recompiling after changing a single line in bevy-ecs would take about two minutes on my machine, but I don't feel like confirming, because...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      (Cont.)
      Just building a project is nerve-wracking. cargo build will connect to the internet to pull in dependencies, and most projects pull in hundreds of packages. Bevy's lock file lists 600 packages, for example.

      Each and every one of those packages may contain a build.rs script, for performing build tasks, and each and every one of those scripts runs without any form of sandboxing. Not that sandboxing is much of a solution, but the point is that you get no protection whatsoever. Cargo will not ask you to audit any of those scripts, and most people probably wouldn't do that anyway, even if it asked, because so many of them will be running on your machine when you build a new project.

      It's great, npm is what every low-level programmer has just been begging for. It also has the same size issue as npm, I recall my bevy build directory being 10 GiB, I think? Funny enough, the majority of it was Cargo dependency information, not even the dependencies themselves.

      In my opinion, Cargo, and package managers like it, are fundamentally flawed. The idea of a package manager specifically for a particular language is stupid, because languages don't exist in a vacuum. I wanna elaborate on this, but it's the least relevant part of the post and I had to trim it for the character limit.

      Despite all of this, I don't think Rust is all bad. The language has its fair share of warts, but it was undoubtedly much nicer to work in than C. However, I don't know if I could recommend it in good faith. I think it depends on what you're doing, really. If you're writing desktop software, you probably don't need Rust or C. There are probably better languages for that, but it's not my specialty so I can't really give you any particular names. What I can tell you is that garbage collection is not the performance killer it's made out to be. Plenty of games use garbage collected languages and run just fine. So I wouldn't disregard a language on that basis.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        you only download these packages once per project.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Cargo will connect to the internet and pull in dependencies
        Oh no! My project that requires other people's code that I don't have locally will need to go to the internet and pull that code in.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >et me tell you how increasing your surface of attack is actually a good thing
          nah, fanks, im good

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >C doesn't need any dependencies
            Lol, lmao even.

            I have not elaborated on why I don't like C, but I think you'll figure it out yourself if you learn it. It's just a very weak language. It's worth knowing anyway, because most things happen to be built on it, and the operating system it accompanied. It's ubiquitous, but that ubiquity is not due to its own merit, it's due to a quirk of history.

            [...]
            Yes, sorry for the ambiguity, I didn't mean to say that it connects to the internet every time you build a project. Though I've indeed had it connect to the internet unprompted several times before, but I'm not entirely sure why. I've also had rustup automatically connect to the internet to pull a newer stable toolchain before, it really frustrated me. Maybe it's because I didn't have stable pinned to a particular version, I don't know.

            [...]
            No comment.

            >No comment
            No arguments more like.

            >Be me
            >Have to develop an interface to a message bus called NATS
            >Don't have any NATS header files locally
            >Go to git
            >Pull code
            >Start development
            Functionally identical if I'd done it in Rust, or Python or Node. Just with additional manual steps.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            dats not what i wrote
            what i meant is:
            c doesnt have a dependency manager.
            when you build your project gcc/clang/(c)make wont try to connect to the internet to pull in the latest libs.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >c doesnt have a dependency manager.
            Right? So what? If your project has a dependency on someone else's code you're going to do the same thing as a package manager except with more manual steps.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >doing things manually
            yeah. which is a good thing.
            you know, having actual control over what happens to your computer...
            its not like its a pain, youjust have to sudo apt install what you need.
            and if youre coding something serious, you will want to airgap, so you will be installing dependencies manually anyways...

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >package managers are bad
            >just use sudo apt
            Lmao. Kek

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            yeah
            call me old school, but im way more confident when i launch the command myself, exactly when i want it, downloading exactly what i ask it to

            but thats kinda moot anyways since i work on an airgapped machine. so i have to dl the packages and then transfer them on intermediary media.
            still not a problem. still one command to install em. and an even stricter control over what ends up on your computer.

            i dont like automation. i dont trust it.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm sure you have the exact version of xz utils you want then.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >badum tss
            my work environment is actually older than cia man's commits, but thanks for your concerns.
            its actually a moot question too since my work machine is airgapped.

            but yeah, great example as to why automatically getting the latest packages might be a bad idea.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >At first I was like
            >Just sudo apt install whatever
            >But then I was like
            >I work on an air gapped machine and hate automation
            LARP level over 9000.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            whatever lets you sleep at night, man

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You make it sound like I'll be thinking about this interaction and hour from now. I'm just trying to pass the time anon, by the time I go to bed, none this will be on my mind.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >another total fail at grasping the finer elements of human communication
            autism is a hard handicap.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            He's just a glowBlack person

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >racism
            and just like that, opinion discarded, youre a dumbass

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            dumb Black person tourist

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Go back to whatever shithole you came from. No one wants you here.

            trump lost, you vermin

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You have to go back, double Black personhomosexual

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Go back to whatever shithole you came from. No one wants you here.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Don't use a package manager
            >Just sudo apt install what you need
            Troll (or moron) confirmed

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I have not elaborated on why I don't like C, but I think you'll figure it out yourself if you learn it. It's just a very weak language. It's worth knowing anyway, because most things happen to be built on it, and the operating system it accompanied. It's ubiquitous, but that ubiquity is not due to its own merit, it's due to a quirk of history.

        you only download these packages once per project.

        Yes, sorry for the ambiguity, I didn't mean to say that it connects to the internet every time you build a project. Though I've indeed had it connect to the internet unprompted several times before, but I'm not entirely sure why. I've also had rustup automatically connect to the internet to pull a newer stable toolchain before, it really frustrated me. Maybe it's because I didn't have stable pinned to a particular version, I don't know.

        >Cargo will connect to the internet and pull in dependencies
        Oh no! My project that requires other people's code that I don't have locally will need to go to the internet and pull that code in.

        No comment.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >use package manager
        >package manager downloads packages
        >why is this happening to me???

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >>use package manager
          Not only are you sorely lacking in reading comprehension skills (If you were not, you would have caught the "cargo build" line, you are also clearly extremely inept. Or, at least, you have never used cargo before. Because Cargo is not just a "package manager," it's also a build system that every Rust project builds with.

          Do you really find it so disagreeable for me to say that, for a build system to connect to the internet, pull in 600 unique dependencies, and perhaps execute a build script for each of those without even asking me to look at it beforehand is unacceptable?

          Since you have clearly never used Rust before, let me also add that locking the dependencies of a library to a particular version is generally advised against in Rust-land. That is, library creators are advised to have their libraries always pull in the latest version of all their dependencies when they're built for a particular project. I'm sure, given how much of a pozzed Black personisraelite homosexual lover you are, that you'd be pleased to know that creating new library crates with cargo new will automatically add the Cargo.lock to your .gitignore... Or so was the case, until fairly recently. Now it doesn't. Seems they realized that it's a bad idea, unfortunately for you: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2023/08/29/committing-lockfiles.html

          You should stop engaging in bad faith, or have a nice day. Preferably the latter.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Do you really find it so disagreeable for me to say that, for a build system to connect to the internet, pull in 600 unique dependencies, and perhaps execute a build script for each of those without even asking me to look at it beforehand is unacceptable?
            Yes. When you run apt or pacman they will do the same.
            Also this is purely skill issue. If you want, you can just build all the dependencies yourself. You have chosen to use a package manager and now you are complaining that package manager is doing package manager things.

            This is a (You) issue. If you don't want to use a package manager do not use a package manager.

            >Since you have clearly never used Rust before
            That false. Whatever is the rest of your argument, you are building it on the base of false premise so I won't even bother with it. Tldr

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            People like you are the reason why this board is insufferable. In fact, I would struggle to even call you a person.

            >Yes. When you run apt or pacman they will do the same.
            No, it is not an apt comparison. Not only do those not run build scripts on your system, they're also not public package repositories that anyone can shit into and update the packages of. You probably don't know this, but crates.io is based on GitHub.

            you have clearly never used Rust before
            >That false.
            If you have indeed used Rust before, then you must be either staggeringly stupid, or simply just very inexperienced. This excessive confidence tends to be common with both groups.

            >for a build system to connect to the internet, pull in 600 unique dependencies, and perhaps execute a build script for each of those without even asking me to look at it beforehand is unacceptable?
            NTA but you can do all of that in make, not sure why you are singling out cargo.

            >but you can do all of that in make
            Yes, you raise a good point. Later on in the message, though, I elaborate on why it's particularly a problem with cargo:
            >let me also add that locking the dependencies of a library to a particular version is generally advised against in Rust-land. That is, library creators are advised to have their libraries always pull in the latest version of all their dependencies when they're built for a particular project.
            It's a matter of what is done in practice, and what is advised. A strength of package management schemes like cargo and npm is that they allow you to very easily add dependencies to your project. That's not a bad thing, but it, in part, enables the problem I'm describing. You're simply not going to have a Makefile or an SConstruct script or whatever pulling in 600 dependencies and running build scripts for each of those individually. Of course, there's also the problem of the ever-shifting target that I mentioned. Libraries don't lock their dependencies, so the dependency versions your project pulls in today are not going to be the same as the ones it pulls in tomorrow. That comes with its own slew of issues.

            With how short the character limit is, it feels like IQfy is directly hostile to useful discussion. It's an anime site, after all.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >No, it is not an apt comparison.
            Yes, they are far worse. Apt and pacman run as root user and can really compromise the frick out of your system.

            >they're also not public package repositories that anyone can shit into and update the packages of.
            Haha, you sure about it?
            CVE-2024-3094

            >If you have indeed used Rust before, then you must be either staggeringly stupid, or simply just very inexperienced. This excessive confidence tends to be common with both groups.
            You are getting emotional.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Haha, you sure about it?
            >CVE-2024-3094
            This isn't the grand point you think it is. That does nothing to dispute the fact that both the Debian and the Arch Linux repositories are not publicly writable to. In the crates.io case, anyway can add crates. If you really were familiar with Rust, you would know that name-squatting has become a really big problem there, and Rust users constantly asking for package namespacing. Of course, it's not going to happen, because crates.io is based on GitHub.

            >You are getting emotional.
            Oh, you may be right, perhaps I am. It brings me to the verge of tears, thinking about how it must be like to be you. But I suppose life ultimately is fair, ignorance is your bliss and all that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >That does nothing to dispute the fact that both the Debian and the Arch Linux repositories are not publicly writable to.
            And yet that didn't stop malware from being installed that compromised entire servers.

            >Oh, you may be right, perhaps I am. It brings me to the verge of tears
            I respect honesty.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >locking the dependencies of a library to a particular version advised against in Rust-land.
            By who? That does sound like bad practice to me, but it doesn't seem to be a problem with cargo but how it's being used, cargo let's you pin to a particular version and when using cargo add <dependency> will automatically pin your version to the one you pulled in (which by default is the latest version, but will be pinned to that version in your lock file). If you don't want that behavior, then you can either change the cargo file manually (see: https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/specifying-dependencies.html) or, I think you can use cargo add <dependency>@<version>, could be mistaken though.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >cargo let's you pin to a particular version
            I'm aware of that, and I would take much less trouble with it (the Rust package ecosystem) if so was the common behavior for libraries.

            >By who?
            By people like the tokio maintainer: https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/164qfjm/change_in_guidance_on_committing_lockfiles_rust/

            It's unfortunate. Though it seems like the official position is indeed shifting/has shifted on this. The Cargo maintainers have backtracked and now tell people to "do what is best for them." It's unfortunately been the default behavior for most of Cargo's life though, and so, the majority of library crates on crates.io still don't check in their lock files.

            If the "package manager" and "build system" parts of cargo were cleanly segregated, and it didn't try to pull shit from the internet all the fricking time, I would probably actually be quite alright with using it. And it's not like this is a criticism of the core Rust language, either.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >for a build system to connect to the internet, pull in 600 unique dependencies, and perhaps execute a build script for each of those without even asking me to look at it beforehand is unacceptable?
            NTA but you can do all of that in make, not sure why you are singling out cargo.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Python is a subset of C++, so it would've been an optimal choice if C++ wasn't so complex, so learn it if you're ready to commit. C is Cimple and good. Rust is a meme.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    start with C. you will learn low-ish level operations without having to learn either rusts or C++ subsystems at the same time.
    also learning C forces you to learn to manipulate raw pointers,which you will have to handle in C++ or rust at some point or another
    divide to conquer kind of deal
    then raw pointers are a part of C++ so even in C++ jobs its implicitly expected that you know C

    concerning rust, pointer arithmetic is entirely different from safe rust, but is indeed part of unsafe.
    so you will basically write C when you write unsafe rust

    but dont focus too much on C. once you get a grip on things, move onto
    C++ bc theres literally 100 x as much jobs in C++ than in rust.
    and then learn rust for maximum flexibility.

    you dont learn C to use it in your career.
    you learn C because its the most efficient way of getting acquainted with low level concepts
    theres embedded, theres cuda/opencl that are basically C but kinda asynchronous, but the job pool is very small, so you gotta be really good to get a C job

    and whoever says to start with anything else than C is an autismo moron and knows shit from frick about learning methods.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Got it. Learn C++ first then "dip" into C when needed.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        That's a midwit take. If you feel you need to "dip into C" then it means your knowledge is still lacking.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Going balls deep on C is pointless unless you're writing kernel code or embedded.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Rust/C++ is perfectly fine for kernels.
            C in embedded makes sense only if it's a must because nothing else is supported. Use C++/Rust if possible.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            So what's the use case of C then?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Teaching students the basics of systems programming.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Cool but I need to learn something employable. Learning Latin may help with learning Frog or Daego but it won't make me sound like a native speaker.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Students are taught C to understand the basics, not to all use it at work.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If that's the case then why can't I use Pascal or anything else?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You can. Learning Pascal will just make it harder to move to other languages, which are commonly C-like.
            At school, I was taught Pascal first.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's a reason to use C for 3-6 weeks. Which, not coincidentally, is how much time I personally invested into it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The emperor would just use binary, what kind of heretic made that edit?

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You should go with Zig.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Both the Rust and the C users ITT are totally incompetent. Almost seems like this whole board is incompetent.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >C users ITT are totally incompetent
      we're still writing code, some of which you might use someday

      i would be terrified if i were you.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        No one believes that you're a C developer lol.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          but my renumeration is not dependent on your belief... so we're good i guess...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It is. I'm a total fraud who hasn't written code in 3 years but I know more than 95% of these fricking cretins. I think they're all Indian.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Learn C first and then Rust. Don't bother with the pajeetware that is C++.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      And I forgot: if someone ever forces you to write C++ code, just write it as if it were C with classes. You will get performance ratings that will make your (most likely brown and shit-stained) peers seethe in constant and unending anger. Because that's the C++ dev: in perpetual anger, knowing he bet for the wrong, poorly stitched together, tumbling and dying horse.
      I generally only see programming languages as tools but I genuinely cannot wait for the day C++ just fricking dies. What a piece of shit and a sad excuse of a "language".

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >You will get performance ratings that will make your (most likely brown and shit-stained) peers seethe in constant and unending anger.
        I'm tech enthusiast, but I don't work in the IT field, can you explain to me why the frick there's pajeets everywhere in the IT industry? They can't be better?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >can you explain to me why the frick there's pajeets everywhere in the IT industry
          C++ and Java exist.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >can you explain to me why the frick there's pajeets everywhere in the IT industry?

          They learn a valuable skill with freely available information then sell their labor for peanuts while leaving no ass unkissed.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        troony

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Isn't C++ basically the hardest (non esoteric) language to actually learn and use properly due to how vast and complex it is?
      Jeets flock to Java and C#

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        modern java is a good language for writing software. Your focus is on the software and not some quirky internet troony cult like rust (or Godot in gamedev).

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Depends on what you consider hard. Rust abstractions are harder to understand than C++. But C++ has significantly larger feature set that you need to learn to understand it. Languages like APL are much harder to read and languages like Ada spark are much harder to write it because of how constrained they are. Haskell is hard because of all the abstract complex theory behind it and Lisp can be hard because everyone uses it differently.

        There is many flavors in how hard a language is.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Hardest to become good at.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's PHP because you have high chance of killing yourself halfway through.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        C++ is effectively esoteric.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        template metaprogramming in C++ is a whole language on itself

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All three
    Also assembly, RISC-V if you want to avoid x86 legacy clunkiness, though it isn't too bad if you're familiar with assembly in general.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Odin

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Depends:
    C++ for 3d engines, rendering, games, gui, ML

    Rust for systems, backends, hobby stuff, dilating

    C for embedded, systems, fun

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Rust is pretty bad for backend. Use TS/Node/Python instead. However it would be a better pick for 3D engines and rendering.

      For games, it's best to just choose a preexisting engine and use whatever language it comes with.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >TS
        >Node
        No. Rust servers are a-okay, and c++ is far ahead for anything graphical. So many libraries and sdks. Rust can't compete, especially when it comes to interacting with cuda or gpu in general.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >and c++ is far ahead for anything graphical. So many libraries and sdks. Rust can't compete, especially when it comes to interacting with cuda or gpu in general.
          GUI? Sure.
          No idea about cuda, but if you are making renderers or 3D engines you are going to use OpenGL or Vulcan or even render in software and it doesn't matter if you pick Rust or C++. I made a ray tracer and 3d engine in Rust without any significant issues.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All are bad languages. Use Cakelisp, Nelua, or Odin.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Aren't C++ C# just C but "expanded"?

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I really haven’t seen why I would use cpp over c for SOLO game dev. File scope and naming conventions replace classes for me. The goto chain and int return codes handle exceptions. SDL is C. Vulkan feels like C. I can implement a hash map as needed. Its all dlls anyway so who cares about a lang package manager. I suppose Cpp may be better for a team.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      videogame devs use unreal engine or unity, not c

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Talking about 2D. Very reasonable to make your own 2D engine (just use SDL).

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        unity uses C# as a scripting tool while the engine itself is implemented in C++
        moron

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >C# as a scripting tool
          Kek humiliation ritual. Microsoft should kill C# to put it out of it's misery.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Having embedded managed language for game logic in top of a systems language for engine is a common practice in modern engines. Still, if you are making a game you will only be using C# in Unity. You pick C++ or Rust when you are actually making an engine itself. Or if you choose to use C++ for UE(but that's hardly C++ at that point as far as I know).

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No one serious choses Rust for a game engine. You choose straight Cpp, or straight C, or C + Lua (Roblox). Bevy existing doesn’t mean anyone actually uses it. Zig, Odin, and hell common lisp probably have more shipped games than Rust. Also most engine programmers using Cpp quite literally do “C with classes”. Debug ability is king and nothing is better than C besides ASM itself.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Bevy existing doesn’t mean anyone actually uses it.
            It arguably even threatens real game development as a heat vampire, taking away work that could go into real engines, same way the language takes away work that could go into just fixing c++/C, if the people making it even had a little bit of clue they would stop, or they're doing it on purpose to collapse society

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Kek I can imagine a team trying to make a game in Rust
            >Ok, let's define our types
            >Holy War of Armchair PL Theorists
            >By the end of the first year, after 557 social media posts and passive aggressive taunts they come to a decision of what types to use
            >year 2 starts
            >3 devs decide to make a fork and leave
            >The remaining half of the perform an estrogen-induced 41%
            >Game studio closes

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Kek I can imagine a team trying to make a game in C
            >arbitrary code execution just from pushing buttons on the controller
            Wait, they did that. It's called the Nintendo 64!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No one serious choses to make a game engine period. People who make engines at best end up with barely functional toy project.

            Making a serious game engine is huge endeavor. They are made by large teams and take a lot of time. No one will pick Lisp, Odin or zig or C in fricking 2024 to make something this complex and expensive. C++ and Rust are pretty much only suitable for that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            What if you are trying to learn how to make an engine and not necessarily make a game? I work on engine dev to stay sharp since as a high end swe I barely code. If I got a game job I would want to work on graphics/engine anyway. Vulkan has uses for AI also. I have already gotten good enough at leetcode so I just need to brush up for a couple days when I interview. Mrtd

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            C++ might have better gamedev related learning materials if you are really starting. If you already have rough idea of what you are doing and are fine supporting yourself with just theory, Rust might be better for hobby project like that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If I were going to use something other than C it would be:

            1. Odin
            2. Zig
            3. C++
            4. Common Lisp
            5. NIM
            6. Embedded Lua
            7. Java
            8. D
            9. C#
            10. Rust

            Id rather do other things than solo dev a custom 2D engine with Rust. Its more painful than Java 1.6 to code in.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Sounds like skill issue.
            For me, it wouldn't be painful in literally any of these(except zig because I do not have any experience in it and the aliasing bug sounds like a nightmare yo debug).

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Rust is a solid candidate with modern tools and programming principles but C++ is well established although the tooling is archaic.
    Rust learned a lot from C++'s mistakes and tries to present a lot of guardrails so you don't mistakenly have a nice day in the foot.
    Most my programming tasks can afford a GC but if I were to touch low level, Rust would be my only choice.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is Haskell low level?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      In a way yes because it's the language closest to pure math with pure functions and immutability.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        that would still make it high level, low level would be something like gallina or agda

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Rust unsafe is more unsafe than C/C++
    Rust without unsafe is just bad C#

    Use C++ or C# OP

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Rust without unsafe is just bad C#
      ??
      In what way? Are you moronic?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What features does it have? Safety? C# has that
        They are the same

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Performance.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No one seriously cares whether or not a third worlder with a favelatop can run a program or not lmao

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            C# has the pretty much the same performance as safe Rust or even faster in some cases (especially now that they're going hard on the profile-guided optimizations)

            C# has C interop, structures to avoid memory allocations like spans and memory<T>, stackalloc, unsafe context for pointer shit

            there's not much missing here, GC does require some micro managing but it's not like safe rust doesn't have any overhead either. it's literally pointless to write Rust, even Java is fricking better lmao

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Performance.

            https://hotforknowledge.com/2024/01/13/1brc-in-dotnet-among-fastest-on-linux-my-optimization-journey/#results
            forgot to link this, funny how I never get any replies after this link 😉

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You don't get any replies because it's a self-own.
            As usual, Rust beats the shit out of dotnet. I'm not surprised at all.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            there's like 3 .NET solutions and 3 Java solutions that are faster than the only real Rust solution (that follows the rules)
            lmao
            you're the one coping

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >that follows the rules
            Nice copeout. The only rule is to solve the problem.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Lol, the rust solution is literally non compliant: https://github.com/RagnarGrootKoerkamp/1brc?tab=readme-ov-file#one-billion-row-challenge
            >Note that I do make some assumptions:
            >Lines in the input are at most 33 characters, including the newline.
            >City names are uniquely determined by their first and last 8 characters.
            >Each input line contains a city drawn uniform random from the set of available cities.

            Last one is fine, first 2 are blatantly against the spec: https://github.com/gunnarmorling/1brc?tab=readme-ov-file#rules-and-limits
            >Input value ranges are as follows:
            >Station name: non null UTF-8 string of min length 1 character and max length 100 bytes, containing neither ; nor n characters. (i.e. this could be 100 one-byte characters, or 50 two-byte characters, etc.)
            >Temperature value: non null double between -99.9 (inclusive) and 99.9 (inclusive), always with one fractional digit
            >There is a maximum of 10,000 unique station names

            Textbook definition of optimizing to the training set lol. Still beats C# though so I guess that's nice lmao. Continue seething though :^)

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >all that cope
            Too bad I’m not readn’em

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >rusttard is a zoomer adhd nocoder with no attention span
            Tale as old as time

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            there's like 3 .NET solutions and 3 Java solutions that are faster than the only real Rust solution (that follows the rules)
            lmao
            you're the one coping

            It's a cool blog post but if you're looking at just a single Rust solution (that (based on line count) seems much lower effort than the C# solution) you're probably not getting a particularly accurate picture
            I'm going to give it a better look later because it's interesting in its own right but n=1 is not compelling evidence

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            sure, it's not a perfect example by any means, but these GC languages getting this close to C++ and Rust is still a thing I like to bring up.
            Granted, the problem itself is a lot about just big file I/O and every language supports memory mapping...

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's worth bringing up but it really doesn't justify the claim (that safe Rust ~= safe C#) and I don't buy the claim. Have you compared them in depth or are you just going by C#'s feature list?
            Also (and this is an observation (not an argument)) I think the C# code has UB that happens to work on x86 (with a performance penalty) and explodes on ARM? Specifically
            return *(short*)_pointer;
            _pointer is a byte pointer that won't always be aligned.

            And how are you going to emulate the stack using a struct?

            You can put pointers to the stack in the struct. That's how Rust's (non-move) closures work under the hood AFAIK. Or do you mean something else?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >C# has the pretty much the same performance as safe Rust or even faster in some cases (especially now that they're going hard on the profile-guided optimizations)
            Post code and let's benchmark it.
            >PGO
            Rust has PGO as well. What Rust doesn't have is the massive runtime overhead that C# suffers from.
            >C# has C interop
            As does Rust.
            >structures to avoid memory allocations like spans and memory<T>, stackalloc, unsafe context for pointer shit
            As does Rust
            >there's not much missing here
            Yes Rust doesn't have VM and GC warmup overhead.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Unemployed larper

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Unemployed
        no sorry I don't use Rust

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    op is long gone at this point, personal opinions will stack till bump limit B)

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Learn C to learn to program and you will have the foundation to learn anything after that. When you get comfortable with string/byte parsing, pointers, memory management and making your own data structures move on to another language but always keep C in your pocket.
    Don't let anyone convince you that C++ and Rust are your only choices for systems languages either.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Don't let anyone convince you that C++ and Rust are your only choices for systems languages either.
      What else is there?

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    rust has a weird syntax, i can't get used to it
    c++ adds a layer of complexity and functionality that c doesn't really need. I can write everything in c

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I can write everything in c
      Have you never encountered a problem that requires a large hashtable?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Are you aware that its not that hard to implement your own hash table?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It is indeed hard, hashing is still an actively researched topic. Sure, you can shit out a mediocre hashing algorithm, but its not the be all end all.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >it-was-a-hash-table-problem.txt
            It's hard to write a very high performance one. Writing one that works good enough isn't that difficult. In any case, outside of 'muh faang interview' you would just pick one of multiple hash table libraries available for C.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yep anyone who is good at this interviews would just define a hash table interface/type and tell the interviewer you are assuming you have an implementation. If they ask you to implement say it will distract from the main problem but if they want to pivot to that you can implement.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Are you sure there is not one single good C hashtable impl you could copy and paste from the internet?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >implement your own hash table
          >nothing else on the computer can use it

          >use standard hash table
          >all programs on the computer share the same types, methods, serialization, etc.

          It is indeed hard, hashing is still an actively researched topic. Sure, you can shit out a mediocre hashing algorithm, but its not the be all end all.

          If it's the hashing algorithm you're worried about, a lot of languages let you specify a hashing function which still uses the same type of hash table.

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pascal, you fricking scrub

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    c, c++, rust all have the same level of autism, but certain languages are better at certain jobs / tools than others.
    personally any other language, like JS or python would be better and you should just use high performance libraries instead to actually produce something of value, since autistic languages tend to be unproductive.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the same level of autism

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        They have different kinds of autism but the autism level is about the same. I’d argue C is slightly less though.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >I’d argue C is slightly less though.

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Forth

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It is not possible to understand Rust until you have written enough C or C++ to hate them. 90% of Rust's design decisions come from practical experience, but if you haven't written enough C++ to get fricked over 5000 times by some bullshit language """feature""" (most of IQfy), Rust makes no sense.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *