Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's basically a replacement for C/C++, but safer, with more functional flavor, and better support for parallel programming. If used properly, Rust should be faster than Java or Go because it can create non-garbage-collected objects. Mozilla is writing a parallel browser called Servo in Rust.

When a company declares some language X as a replacement for C/C++, X actually becomes replacement, or to be more precise, attracts engineers from some other language L, but C/C++ stays in place :)

If they can make a safer, more secure and less verbose C/C++, without giving up on what makes C/C++ a good choice for some projects (low-level control and performance), I'm sure some people will switch (I know I will). It's just that no one succeeded in this before.

It's just too easy to shoot yourself in the foot with the current C/C++. Combined with developers overestimating themselves and a lack of static checking by compilers, this results in all kinds of hard-to-debug and hard-to-find issues. A language that guarantees no dangling NULL pointers, no buffer overflows and safe concurrency/parallelism is a great promise, at least.

Hopefully it gains enough critical mass. We'll see where this goes...

Look at Ada (Ada 2012 came out this year). Safer and more secure, not less verbose though. You can do real-time, parallel, distributed, reliable stuff with it. Try the OSS GNAT compiler (comes with your gcc or look at http://libre.adacore.com/ ).

Frequently, yeah, but the Rust developers seem to actually have some idea what makes C/C++ successful, so I think it stands a better chance than Java/C#/Go.

Wasn't D the replacement of C++?


Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact