This nice post from @steveklabnik on pointers in @rustlang gives a good sense of the language's flavor: http://words.steveklabnik.com/pointers-in-rust-a-guide …
@wm I don't think it's any more complicated than, say, Scala, it just spends its complexity in different ways. Wish it had less ~&@ though.
-
-
@avibryant@wm We may replace the @ syntax with a librarified type GC<T>.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@avibryant@wm "No more complicated than Scala." Is that the bar these days? -
@peterseibel@wm well, it's also much less complicated than Common Lisp. /me ducks -
Tweet unavailable
-
@antifuchs@avibryant@peterseibel@wm The complexity of CL is elsewhere!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@avibryant immediates, references, three different types of pointers (some of which invoke the GC), autoboxing, traits, and generics? -
@avibryant in my day, we only had one type of pointer. and that was all we needed! -
@wm@avibryant In practice C++ has many different ptr types (aka smart ptrs), but unsafely.@rustlang aims to make the important ones safe!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.