Is rust going to replace C++

[mche...@gmail.com]

Hi All
Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
Thanks
Peter

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick (rick.c...@gmail.com) is not welcome to this post. He is a fucking asshole, keep spamming different newsgroups
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi All
> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
> Thanks
> Peter
>

Please don't swear here.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net

[Vir Campestris]

On 03/12/2017 19:27, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hi All
>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>>
>
>
> Please don't swear here.
>

:)

I hear lots of people talking about Rust. I haven't yet met anyone
writing it.

For that matter, I see a lot of C code where C++ would do a better job,
and would work fine on the platform.

Some of that C code is in .cpp files :(

Andy

[guinne...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:27:35 UTC, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Hi All
> > Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
> > Thanks
> > Peter
>
> Please don't swear here.

I know you are cranky about what you consider swearing but which of the words (that you quoted, above) are you claiming to be “swearing”?

[bitrex]

No

[red floyd]

On 12/03/2017 11:27 AM, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hi All
>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>>
>
>
> Please don't swear here.
>
>

Take your self righteousness and fuck off.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

> Take your self righteousness and .. off.

It's not self-righteousness. It's common decenc and a respect for God
who teaches us to shun profanity for it will only lead to increasing
ungodliness (as you know and can see in the behavior of people).

God has a better plan and purpose for us than obscene things.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Ian Collins]

On 12/04/2017 04:31 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 10:24:03 PM UTC-5, red floyd wrote:
>> On 12/03/2017 11:27 AM, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Hi All
>>>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please don't swear here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Take your self righteousness and .. off.
>
> It's not self-righteousness.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/04/swearing-really-good/

http://www.menshealth.co.uk/healthy/stress/i-swear-its-good-for-you

--
Ian.

[Daniel]

On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 10:24:03 PM UTC-5, red floyd wrote:

I think Brian was making a joke :-)

[Melzzzzz]

Everything is shitting except pissing, and pissing is shitting when you
piss up the wind!

--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...

[Juha Nieminen]

mche...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++

"Better C++'s" have been introduced over the past 20 or so years.
Some of them have succeeded on their own (like Java and C#), others
have simply faded to obscurity. None have succeeded in replacing C++
so far. Somehow I doubt that will change this time either.

[David Brown]

If only that were true!

Brian and Rick are on crusades, with such blind, arrogant
self-righteousness that they don't see that they are totally
counter-productive. No one with their head screwed on right could
imagine that Brian's knee-jerk posts would reduce swearing, or that Rick
would convince anyone to join his weird cult.

[Jerry Stuckle]

I've also seen a lot of C++ code where C would be more appropriate. And
yes, some of that is in .cpp files - but I like that because of the
tighter restrictions of C++. It can help find some bugs that the looser
typing of C doesn't.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================

[Chris Vine]

On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 09:51:31 -0800 (PST)
mche...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi All
> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++

I think it is the only new language around which stands a chance, and
even then it might fail. It seems to be a seriously nice language,
taking what seems to me to be the best of C++ and ML, together with an
original approach to concurrency. Bringing memory safety into the type
system whilst avoiding garbage collection seems novel, as also does
bringing thread safety into the type system (a better solution in my
view than languages which rely on functional purity[1]). It is also
pleasing that is has got rid of the distinction in the ALGOL languages
between expressions and statements - almost everything evaluates to
something.

Very few projects actually seem to use it at present. I have also
never used it except in toy playing around in order to take a look at
it.

Chris

[1] Whenever a result has to be passed from one thread to another, you
cannot avoid impure synchronization events occurring. Better, in my
view, to do what rust does and build it into the type system and except
that fact.

[Dombo]

Op 04-Dec-17 om 0:09 schreef guinne...@gmail.com:

Probably this part of the original message that woodbrain "conveniently"
snipped:

[Chris Vine]

Technically speaking I think guinness.tony is correct, in that "he is a
fucking asshole" is profane but not swearing. However standards have
slipped in the mid-West and I believe that those who are of a tender
disposition there might mistakenly apply the word "swearing" to it.

Chris

[Dombo]

Op 04-Dec-17 om 20:45 schreef Chris Vine:

> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 09:51:31 -0800 (PST)
> mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hi All
>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>
> I think it is the only new language around which stands a chance, and
> even then it might fail. It seems to be a seriously nice language,
> taking what seems to me to be the best of C++ and ML, together with an
> original approach to concurrency. Bringing memory safety into the type
> system whilst avoiding garbage collection seems novel, as also does
> bringing thread safety into the type system (a better solution in my
> view than languages which rely on functional purity[1]). It is also
> pleasing that is has got rid of the distinction in the ALGOL languages
> between expressions and statements - almost everything evaluates to
> something.
>
> Very few projects actually seem to use it at present. I have also
> never used it except in toy playing around in order to take a look at
> it.

Over the decades I've seen many new programming languages that promised
to be the next big thing, yet only a very few stuck. My observation is
that the qualities of the programming language itself is only minor
factor for its success. Programming languages like C and C++ are neither
pure nor elegant, yet despite their flaws and weaknesses are widely
used. A much more important consideration is the ecosystem around the
programming language; availability of libraries, tooling, information
(forums, courses, conferences), availability of skilled programmers,
commercial backing...etc are much more import factors to consider when
choosing a programming language for a project. This makes hard for new
programming languages to replace well established programming languages.

[James R. Kuyper]

I don't see messages posted by the person he was responding to, so I
hadn't seen that part.

That makes sense now. As someone who objects to such language, he quite
reasonably does not want to quote it, either. However, he should at
least have quoted it in explicitly redacted form, so people would have
some idea what he was talking about.

[James R. Kuyper]

On 12/04/2017 03:36 PM, Chris Vine wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 21:27:57 +0100
> Dombo <do...@disposable.invalid> wrote:
>> Op 04-Dec-17 om 0:09 schreef guinne...@gmail.com:
>>> On Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:27:35 UTC, woodb...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:

...

>>>> Please don't swear here.
>>>
>>> I know you are cranky about what you consider swearing but which of
>>> the words (that you quoted, above) are you claiming to be
>>> “swearing”?
>>
>> Probably this part of the original message that woodbrain
>> "conveniently" snipped:
>>
>> Rick (rick.c...@gmail.com) is not welcome to this post. He is a
>> fucking asshole, keep spamming different newsgroups
>
> Technically speaking I think guinness.tony is correct, in that "he is a
> fucking asshole" is profane but not swearing.

I'm curious - what definition of swearing do you use which excludes
those words? Wiktionary defines swearing as the "use of offensive
language", which makes it a highly subjective concept - it depends
entirely upon what language you consider to be offensive. However,
there's certainly a fairly large number of people who do consider those
words offensive. They are being used in this context solely because he
quite reasonably expects the target of those words to consider them
offensive. He's certainly not using those words for their literal meaning.

[bartc]

On 04/12/2017 19:45, Chris Vine wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 09:51:31 -0800 (PST)
> mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hi All
>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>
> I think it is the only new language around which stands a chance, and
> even then it might fail. It seems to be a seriously nice language,
> taking what seems to me to be the best of C++ and ML, together with an
> original approach to concurrency. Bringing memory safety into the type
> system whilst avoiding garbage collection seems novel, as also does
> bringing thread safety into the type system (a better solution in my
> view than languages which rely on functional purity[1]). It is also
> pleasing that is has got rid of the distinction in the ALGOL languages
> between expressions and statements - almost everything evaluates to
> something.

That wasn't the case in Algol68 where everything is a 'unit', and every
unit returns a value even it's just 'void' - including loops.

I used that model (for my home-made languages) for quite a few years,
but eventually dropped it. Because having such a distinction allows more
errors to be detected. In that syntax, both of these would be valid units:

a = b; # test equality
a := b; # assignment

But the first is mostly likely an error. An error that would be easily
detected if the expression 'a = b' wasn't allowed as a statement.

(C and C++ have the same problem with writing 'a == b' as a statement,
although extra compiler checks can warn about that. But it's a less
likely error to make. There writing 'a = b' instead 'a == b' in an
expression is more problematic.)

--
bartc

[Chris Vine]

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 15:50:23 -0500
[snip]

> I'm curious - what definition of swearing do you use which excludes
> those words? Wiktionary defines swearing as the "use of offensive
> language", which makes it a highly subjective concept - it depends
> entirely upon what language you consider to be offensive. However,
> there's certainly a fairly large number of people who do consider
> those words offensive. They are being used in this context solely
> because he quite reasonably expects the target of those words to
> consider them offensive. He's certainly not using those words for
> their literal meaning.

The biblical injunction against swearing, which is what religious
extremists like to attach themselves to (by name transference brought
about by language evolution) is concerned with oath-taking. In terms of
the ten commandments, this is about the third commandment in the
Septuagint (in some versions of the bible the first and second
commandments are elided in which case this becomes the second): "thou
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain".

The original and still proper meaning of the verb "to swear" is to take
an oath. If you go to court you swear an oath to tell the truth.

If you want to take this further please go off line. It is
inappropriate to go into this in further detail in this newsgroup.

[Paavo Helde]

Agreed. C++ is a multi-paradigm language. Actually what it resembles
more is a whole suite of different languages, for which it provides a
consistent and zero overhead integration. One can write a program in any
of those sublanguages or more commonly in some convenient mix of those.
It is essential that one of those languages is bare-metal C, and it is
essential it can be mixed with others with zero overhead.

Anything which could replace C++ needs to support all those
languages/paradigms and add some new goodies on the top, so the result
would be even more complex and hairy than the current C++. IOW the
replacement would not be better than C++, in the opinion of people who
want to replace it.

Meanwhile the people who do not want to replace C++ are busy adding yet
more paradigms into the mix, like metaclasses, thus making the task of
C++ replacers even more difficult.

Cheers
Paavo

[Dombo]

Op 04-Dec-17 om 9:37 schreef David Brown:

> On 04/12/17 05:09, Daniel wrote:
>> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 10:24:03 PM UTC-5, red floyd wrote:
>>> On 12/03/2017 11:27 AM, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Hi All
>>>>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> Please don't swear here.
>>>
>>> Take your self righteousness and fuck off.
>>
>> I think Brian was making a joke :-)
>
> If only that were true!
>
> Brian and Rick are on crusades, with such blind, arrogant
> self-righteousness that they don't see that they are totally
> counter-productive.

Either don't see or don't really care. My guess is that Brian and Rick
just do it in the hope to score points with their imaginary friend and
are not expecting that doing the same thing over and over again will
yield different results. I might give those guys too much credit though...

[Chris Vine]

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 21:44:25 +0100
Dombo <do...@disposable.invalid> wrote:
[snip]

> Over the decades I've seen many new programming languages that
> promised to be the next big thing, yet only a very few stuck. My
> observation is that the qualities of the programming language itself
> is only minor factor for its success. Programming languages like C
> and C++ are neither pure nor elegant, yet despite their flaws and
> weaknesses are widely used. A much more important consideration is
> the ecosystem around the programming language; availability of
> libraries, tooling, information (forums, courses, conferences),
> availability of skilled programmers, commercial backing...etc are
> much more import factors to consider when choosing a programming
> language for a project. This makes hard for new programming languages
> to replace well established programming languages.

Those are good observations, and I agree with you. The thing that
might push rust over the edge is that it offers a reasonable solution
to the difficulty many programmers find with concurrency. As I said
though, it might fail. Time will tell.

The fact that C++ and C are not pure is not a significant problem to me.
I am not overwhelmed by Haskell, I don't like lazy evaluation, and I am
not convinced by the work-arounds used in pure languages for the fact
that we live in a universe where mutability happens and any program
which produces a result is impure. I think rust offers decent, and
possibly better, solutions for that. Again time will tell.

[David Brown]

As someone who objects to such language, Brian should have kept quite -
he knows fine well that every one of his "Please don't swear" posts
provokes numerous new posts with swearing. By the definition attributed
to Einstein, this is insane behaviour by Brian.

[Ben Bacarisse]

Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> writes:

> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 09:51:31 -0800 (PST)
> mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hi All
>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>
> I think it is the only new language around which stands a chance, and
> even then it might fail. It seems to be a seriously nice language,

<snip>

> It is also
> pleasing that is has got rid of the distinction in the ALGOL languages
> between expressions and statements - almost everything evaluates to
> something.

I think that characterisation is a little off in that the last of Algols
(68) took a very similar view. If *was* at the heart of Algol 60, and
*that* Algol version inspired whole host of languages that make a
similar distinction, but many others borrowed from the more flexible
Algol-68. C's assignment expression are probably Algol 68 inspired (and
they are even more similar in C++ where the value is a reference).

<snip>
--
Ben.

[Ben Bacarisse]

Ben Bacarisse <ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> writes:

> Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 09:51:31 -0800 (PST)
>> mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Hi All
>>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++
>>
>> I think it is the only new language around which stands a chance, and
>> even then it might fail. It seems to be a seriously nice language,
> <snip>
>> It is also
>> pleasing that is has got rid of the distinction in the ALGOL languages
>> between expressions and statements - almost everything evaluates to
>> something.
>
> I think that characterisation is a little off in that the last of Algols
> (68) took a very similar view. If *was* at the heart of Algol 60, and

Bad typo: "It (this distinction) was..."

> *that* Algol version inspired whole host of languages that make a
> similar distinction, but many others borrowed from the more flexible
> Algol-68. C's assignment expression are probably Algol 68 inspired (and
> they are even more similar in C++ where the value is a reference).

--
Ben.

[Ian Collins]

On 12/05/2017 09:36 AM, Chris Vine wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 21:27:57 +0100
> Dombo <do...@disposable.invalid> wrote:
>> Op 04-Dec-17 om 0:09 schreef guinne...@gmail.com:
>>> On Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:27:35 UTC, woodb...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6,
>>>> mche...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Hi All
>>>>> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay
>>>>> in C++ Thanks
>>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> Please don't swear here.
>>>
>>> I know you are cranky about what you consider swearing but which of
>>> the words (that you quoted, above) are you claiming to be
>>> “swearing”?
>>
>> Probably this part of the original message that woodbrain
>> "conveniently" snipped:
>>
>> Rick (rick.c...@gmail.com) is not welcome to this post. He is a
>> fucking asshole, keep spamming different newsgroups
>
> Technically speaking I think guinness.tony is correct, in that "he is a
> fucking asshole" is profane but not swearing.

Profane and derogatory to donkeys.

--
Ian.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 11:51:57 AM UTC-6, mche...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi All
> Is rust going to replace C++? The world seems want to stay in C++

Without online code generation, I think Rust will languish.

However, I think C++ could benefit from drawing on ideas
from Rust and/or Swift:

http://foonathan.net/blog/2017/12/04/exceptions-vs-expected.html

. Ideally these things would be in C++ 2020.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net