Conversation

p h z
@phaazon_
It is a system PL as it was designed to be. But it’s a damn good system PL with most abstractions, as you might have guessed and already known, coming from Haskell. So yeah, we can use it as a general PL (and we do). :)
2
2
p h z
@phaazon_
As for the nightly compilers, I keep most of public-oriented crates on stable but I have a few of them that requires several nightly compilers. As features get stabilized, they’ll eventually end up in stable. :)
2
deech
@deech
What's good about Rust as a general purpose PL compared to something like Nim? I've done non-trivial things in Rust and I felt like I was taking on a lot of complexity and losing a ton of abstraction for most my problems to benefit a small % of them.
2
5
Yo Eight
@yoeight
Exactly. I don't see Rust as expressive as Haskell (my language of choice for many years), but it's a joy to work with it. I have the same feeling with C# for instance.
1
1
deech
@deech
That's what I don't get, this joy everyone keeps talking about. When I have to deal with low level detail for no good reason, where is the joy in that? It's just tedium.
6
4
Anthony Cowley
@a_cowley
I find it satisfying in a “threading the needle” sense: allocations very tightly controlled, and you are confident you got it right because the compiler agrees. Similar to locking down behavior with types in a language with a richer type system.
1
2
Anthony Cowley
@a_cowley
Yes. Just like I enjoy adding types to code that doesn’t have bugs. Its nice for running a server on a low power system and never having to think about it.
3
3
p h z
@phaazon_
When Rust gets HKT, ATC and some other nice things like Π-typing and (I hope) GADTs, it should be hella close to Haskell in terms of abstraction power. I still need to write that type operator RFC, when I think about it. On my way!
2
1