The dominant pattern in rust for this these days is ECS (And c++ seems to be moving over to this too)
-
-
Replying to @ManishEarth
I'm sure this has lots of merit, but.. .. That's a great pile of additional complexity you're bringing in
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @erincandescent
I don't see how OO isn't. especially for Rust's typesystem needs: making oo work with lifetime subtyping is hard we ran across a mini version of this problem for specialization and I don't think we ever properly could figure it out
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth
Maybe with your language designer hat on Not with the language user hat on
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @erincandescent
No, I'm categorically stating that a rust with OO would be unpleasant and complex to use. Either the OO would be super unpleasant, or the lifetimes would be.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @erincandescent
I'm saying this as someone who works full time on one of the few rust codebases that actually has an inheritance system (you need one to represent the DOM) I haven't done rust language design in ages
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @erincandescent
The Rust community is REALLY opposed to OO. There has long been a conspiracy theory going around that Mozilla is secretly hellbent on adding classes to Rust over the objections of the community.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Speaking only for myself, this doesn't match my understanding of the relationship between Rust and OO. Among other things, it seems to use a definition of OO that's carefully crafted to include stuff that Rust has and exclude stuff it doesn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
You mean the other way around? A definition of OO that excludes stuff Rust has and includes classes and inheritance?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yeah. According to this, OO is not: - combining state with functions operating on state u - methods - polymorphism - ad hoc polymorphism - specialization Ok?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Imprecise wording on my part. Replace “OO” with “classes and inheritance”.
-
-
Do you just mean "runtime polymorphism accomplished with vtables not stored with a fat pointer"? Or do you mean the keyword class? The term OO has become a shibboleth that afaict has no actual meaning.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Hard to define exactly. “I know it when I see it” :)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 14 more replies
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.