I kinda feel like complaints that using indexing over refs is "bypassing the borrow checker" miss the point. That's like complaining allocation "bypasses the stack".
what I'm saying, essentially, is that we as language designers shouldn't solve the problems people *think* they have ("borrow checker doesn't go far enough"), but the problems people *actually* have ("ECS are painful"). it doesn't matter if a complaint raised by a non-language-…
-
-
designer doesn't make sense from language design POV, if it highlights a real pain point, it is valid.
-
ECS *isn't* painful, cyclic graph structures are, ECS is a not-painful-in-rust *solution* to that.
-
yes, this is a more clear version of what I'm trying to say.
-
It's worth mentioning: this specific complaint did not come from a rust programmer (it was very clear they didn't use rust), though I've seen forms of it before that did. You're right that we should attempt to XY-problem the underlying complaint. There isn't one here.
-
That said, "cyclic graphs are hard in rust" is def a valid complaint. And there are multiple abstractions or patterns out there that help with this, based on use case. ECS is one, but petgraph/Weak/etc also exist in this space
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.