A language can say what its *values* are without becoming totemic. Easier to vet a feature for "safe" than "simple"
-
-
"fast" is incredibly tricky, but I think the best way to understand Rust's tagline is "Safe & Concurrent, and 1/
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
objectively faster than other languages that can reasonably claim to be safe and concurrent" 2/2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @wycats @withoutboats
imo "fast" is just an easier to grok/measure proxy for "provides control".
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Not necessarily though. Mathematica is fast. It does not provide control. Depends on the context.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @Gankro and
But for general purpose languages, yes, so far "fast" has been a proxy for "provides control".
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I don't love this. asm.js provides control, but that doesn't make *JS* fast.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @ManishEarth and
most dynamic languages have a lot of control (FFI, C APIs) but the lang itself isn't "fast"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
if you would like a more nuanced perspective on this topic, please see: my entire master's thesis :)
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
FFI to C is "bad" control because it's a massive discontinuity in the other axes.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
these are useful ways to think about it that are completely absent from even the best discourse on PL ;)
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.