@wycats @littlecalculist More seriously, Rust 1.0 is worse than some possible rust. But it's clearly not a WiB solution at the larger scale.
-
-
Replying to @samth
@samth@littlecalculist WiB is a tactic, not a statement about absolute quality. Getting enough adoption is existential.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@littlecalculist You can always not ship now and wait to have a better solution. But "you should ship" is not all the essay says.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @samth
@wycats@littlecalculist For example, neither racket nor rust focus on implementation simplicity the way C did.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samth
@samth@littlecalculist right, so if you don't want to get smoked you need to understand this.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @samth
@samth@littlecalculist C will beat your pants off if you don't adopt its tactics. The original essay was telling this to lispers.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@littlecalculist Plenty of things win without those tactics. Java is an example, to pick something different. Or SSL. Or SQL.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @samth
@samth@littlecalculist SQL is so totally WiB. Central planning BiB almost never succeeds. Java shipped without generics.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@littlecalculist I think you're really trivializing the claims in the essay. And Java required a whole new VM for safe remote code!2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@samth @littlecalculist if you're gonna do something totally new, don't drag in the rest. Bytecode VM, no generics. Ownership, not HKT.
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.