Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #67978 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-08-28 16:11 -0500 |
| Last post | 2019-09-09 01:09 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 165 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
"“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2019-08-28 16:11 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-29 02:36 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-29 11:02 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-29 22:21 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-29 13:24 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-29 23:35 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-29 20:00 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-08-29 13:29 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:04 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-08-29 23:11 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-30 10:14 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 07:42 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 14:54 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:07 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 05:14 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-29 06:08 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:10 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 01:00 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:16 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 01:26 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:33 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 06:30 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 15:59 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 07:42 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 14:44 +0000
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 20:07 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 17:13 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 14:53 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-08-29 13:14 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 15:38 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 20:09 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-09-04 08:31 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-05 16:55 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 13:28 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-09-06 02:36 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:13 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 08:38 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 08:51 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:13 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 10:18 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:31 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 10:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 10:47 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-30 11:41 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 11:56 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-30 13:08 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 13:47 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2019-08-31 18:03 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 18:21 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-31 23:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 05:16 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-09-01 03:21 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 12:25 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 12:35 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-09-01 04:13 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-01 23:18 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 14:04 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 07:20 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 16:03 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 18:22 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-01 15:23 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 22:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 06:47 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-02 11:12 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 17:52 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-02 18:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-02 13:05 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 19:33 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-02 17:16 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 06:49 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 08:31 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 08:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 09:06 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 09:19 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 10:30 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-03 07:11 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 13:17 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 15:29 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 15:42 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 15:51 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-03 17:35 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 17:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-09-03 18:51 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 20:03 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 21:53 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:42 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-05 16:56 +0000
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 11:07 -0700
Re: Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-05 19:23 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-06 08:25 +0200
Re: Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-18 16:55 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-06 07:10 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-06 17:16 +1200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-03 20:33 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:38 +0200
Re: "?Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly?: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2019-09-03 22:08 +0000
Re: "?Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly?: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:41 +0200
Re: "?Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly?: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:13 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 21:50 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-09-03 22:43 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:24 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-09-03 11:03 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 12:16 -0700
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-03 20:35 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 22:49 -0700
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 00:20 -0700
Re: Comments on third parties Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-09-07 06:59 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-05 17:17 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 09:03 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-05 20:18 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-09-05 17:16 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 14:40 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-06 10:05 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:33 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 22:14 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2019-09-04 10:47 +1000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-04 16:56 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:37 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2019-09-05 22:02 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-08-31 13:20 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-31 23:45 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-08-30 14:08 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 13:37 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 13:48 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-08-30 15:18 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 14:24 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 15:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 16:23 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 14:40 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 16:57 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 19:19 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 03:05 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-31 12:18 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 11:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-08-31 17:17 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 16:28 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 00:06 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-09-01 15:49 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 16:12 +0200
Error handling strategies (was: Rust is the future of systems programming C is the new Assembly) legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 20:14 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-08 20:29 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 15:42 +0200
Re: "???Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly???: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-08-30 21:03 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-31 09:42 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 23:53 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-06 06:24 -0500
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-06 13:51 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-06 22:03 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-07 10:57 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-07 18:17 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-07 18:48 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-08 12:40 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-09 08:59 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-09 16:35 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-09-07 18:09 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-07 15:32 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-31 04:50 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 18:39 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 20:46 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2019-09-04 01:07 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" William Ahern <william@25thandClement.com> - 2019-09-03 20:04 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:46 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-09-04 04:48 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" "Chris M. Thomasson " <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-09 01:09 -0700
Page 2 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 10:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <almarsoft.9190307201389818932@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68022 |
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:26:49 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee>
wrote:
> On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:16:32 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:00:48 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee=
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > Rust generics are interface based. You cant do anything with
> > > > generic type unless you tell which interfaces satisfies.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. Can you bring example?
> > > The main point of generics seems to work in Rust about like in
C++
> >
> > Not even close. Imagin that you have to cite what abstract base
> > classes tvpe inherits, and only thing you can do with type is
trough
> > interface...
> The examples in documentation ...
> <https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-00-generics.html>
> ... are like that:
> // generic type
> struct Point<T> {
> x: T,
> y: T,
> }
> // generic method of generic type
> impl<T> Point<T> {
> fn x(&self) -> &T {
> &self.x
> }
> }
> // usage
> fn main() {
> let p = Point { x: 5, y: 10 };
> println!("p.x = {}", p.x());
> }
> That does not seem to fit with what you describe.
Try to do something with x...
--
Press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 06:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0c790d17-c6a1-458d-94a9-d85ba54a9564@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68024 |
On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:33:36 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:26:49 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee>
> wrote:
> > On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:16:32 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:00:48 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee=
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Rust generics are interface based. You cant do anything with
> > > > > generic type unless you tell which interfaces satisfies.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. Can you bring example?
> > > > The main point of generics seems to work in Rust about like in
> C++
> > >
> > > Not even close. Imagin that you have to cite what abstract base
> > > classes tvpe inherits, and only thing you can do with type is
> trough
> > > interface...
>
>
> > The examples in documentation ...
> > <https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-00-generics.html>
> > ... are like that:
>
>
> > // generic type
> > struct Point<T> {
> > x: T,
> > y: T,
> > }
> > // generic method of generic type
> > impl<T> Point<T> {
> > fn x(&self) -> &T {
> > &self.x
> > }
> > }
> > // usage
> > fn main() {
> > let p = Point { x: 5, y: 10 };
>
>
> > println!("p.x = {}", p.x());
> > }
>
>
> > That does not seem to fit with what you describe.
>
> Try to do something with x...
But it seemingly did.
Do you mean where I need traits? Like in:
impl<T: Display + PartialOrd> Point<T> {
fn cmp_display(&self) {
if self.x >= self.y { //< here I need PartialOrd
// here I need Display
println!("The largest member is x = {}", self.x);
} else {
println!("The largest member is y = {}", self.y);
}
}
}
That seems Ok type-safety feature.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 15:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <almarsoft.6705690616948350250@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68037 |
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 06:30:30 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee>
wrote:
> On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:33:36 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:26:49 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee=
> >
> > wrote:
> > > On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:16:32 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:00:48 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@ho=
> t.ee=
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Rust generics are interface based. You cant do anything
with
> > > > > > generic type unless you tell which interfaces satisfies.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. Can you bring
example?
> > > > > The main point of generics seems to work in Rust about like
in
> > C++
> > > >
> > > > Not even close. Imagin that you have to cite what abstract
base
> > > > classes tvpe inherits, and only thing you can do with type is
> > trough
> > > > interface...
> >
> >
> > > The examples in documentation ...
> > > <https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-00-generics.html>
> > > ... are like that:
> >
> >
> > > // generic type
> > > struct Point<T> {
> > > x: T,
> > > y: T,
> > > }
> > > // generic method of generic type
> > > impl<T> Point<T> {
> > > fn x(&self) -> &T {
> > > &self.x
> > > }
> > > }
> > > // usage
> > > fn main() {
> > > let p = Point { x: 5, y: 10 };
> >
> >
> > > println!("p.x = {}", p.x());
> > > }
> >
> >
> > > That does not seem to fit with what you describe.
> >
> > Try to do something with x...
> But it seemingly did.
No it just returned value. Don't try to win argument when you don't
have any...
> Do you mean where I need traits? Like in:
You always need traits even to initialize value...
> That seems Ok type-safety feature.
It is not safety feature it is how gemerics are implemented in rust.
Same way it works in Haskell.
--
Press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 07:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e63a5618-5ecf-4c34-9e4e-3e202cbcdef5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68040 |
On Friday, 30 August 2019 17:00:00 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 06:30:30 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee>
> wrote:
> > On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:33:36 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:26:49 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee=
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:16:32 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:00:48 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@ho=
> > t.ee=
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Rust generics are interface based. You cant do anything
> with
> > > > > > > generic type unless you tell which interfaces satisfies.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. Can you bring
> example?
> > > > > > The main point of generics seems to work in Rust about like
> in
> > > C++
> > > > >
> > > > > Not even close. Imagin that you have to cite what abstract
> base
> > > > > classes tvpe inherits, and only thing you can do with type is
> > > trough
> > > > > interface...
> > >
> > >
> > > > The examples in documentation ...
> > > > <https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-00-generics.html>
> > > > ... are like that:
> > >
> > >
> > > > // generic type
> > > > struct Point<T> {
> > > > x: T,
> > > > y: T,
> > > > }
> > > > // generic method of generic type
> > > > impl<T> Point<T> {
> > > > fn x(&self) -> &T {
> > > > &self.x
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > // usage
> > > > fn main() {
> > > > let p = Point { x: 5, y: 10 };
> > >
> > >
> > > > println!("p.x = {}", p.x());
> > > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > > That does not seem to fit with what you describe.
> > >
> > > Try to do something with x...
>
>
> > But it seemingly did.
> No it just returned value. Don't try to win argument when you don't
> have any...
I did not try to win argument, I admit I have none and I just did
not understand your argument (may be I still don't).
> > Do you mean where I need traits? Like in:
>
> You always need traits even to initialize value...
It is Ok I suppose. Writing those "std::enable_if"s for C++<=17
templates is most tedious and ugly.
> > That seems Ok type-safety feature.
>
> It is not safety feature it is how gemerics are implemented in rust.
> Same way it works in Haskell.
It feels similar to required upcoming concepts/constraints of C++20.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 14:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kDaaF.190037$_w5.157137@fx31.am4> |
| In reply to | #68043 |
On 2019-08-30, Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> wrote:
> On Friday, 30 August 2019 17:00:00 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 06:30:30 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee>
>> wrote:
>> > On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:33:36 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
>> > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:26:49 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@hot.ee=
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > On Friday, 30 August 2019 11:16:32 UTC+3, Mel wrote:
>> > > > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:00:48 -0700 (PDT), Öö Tiib<ootiib@ho=
>> > t.ee=
>> > > > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > Rust generics are interface based. You cant do anything
>> with
>> > > > > > > generic type unless you tell which interfaces satisfies.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. Can you bring
>> example?
>> > > > > > The main point of generics seems to work in Rust about like
>> in
>> > > C++
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Not even close. Imagin that you have to cite what abstract
>> base
>> > > > > classes tvpe inherits, and only thing you can do with type is
>> > > trough
>> > > > > interface...
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > The examples in documentation ...
>> > > > <https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-00-generics.html>
>> > > > ... are like that:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > // generic type
>> > > > struct Point<T> {
>> > > > x: T,
>> > > > y: T,
>> > > > }
>> > > > // generic method of generic type
>> > > > impl<T> Point<T> {
>> > > > fn x(&self) -> &T {
>> > > > &self.x
>> > > > }
>> > > > }
>> > > > // usage
>> > > > fn main() {
>> > > > let p = Point { x: 5, y: 10 };
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > println!("p.x = {}", p.x());
>> > > > }
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > That does not seem to fit with what you describe.
>> > >
>> > > Try to do something with x...
>>
>>
>> > But it seemingly did.
>> No it just returned value. Don't try to win argument when you don't
>> have any...
>
> I did not try to win argument, I admit I have none and I just did
> not understand your argument (may be I still don't).
>
>> > Do you mean where I need traits? Like in:
>>
>> You always need traits even to initialize value...
>
> It is Ok I suppose. Writing those "std::enable_if"s for C++<=17
> templates is most tedious and ugly.
>
>> > That seems Ok type-safety feature.
>>
>> It is not safety feature it is how gemerics are implemented in rust.
>> Same way it works in Haskell.
>
> It feels similar to required upcoming concepts/constraints of C++20.
Well, C++ template types are structural and Rust nominative.
That is whole difference.
--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 20:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qkmh6s$sp4$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #67993 |
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> spake the secret code
<qk88hr$uju$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
>How about, instead:
>We take C;
>We add some features to support things like bounds-checked arrays and
>similar;
>We mostly call it done.
Been there, done that, 30 years ago. It's called C++. You only pay
for bounds-checked arrays if you want to pay for it.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 17:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <qkmois$l9e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68178 |
On 9/3/2019 3:07 PM, Richard wrote: > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] > > BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> spake the secret code > <qk88hr$uju$1@dont-email.me> thusly: > >> How about, instead: >> We take C; >> We add some features to support things like bounds-checked arrays and >> similar; >> We mostly call it done. > > Been there, done that, 30 years ago. It's called C++. You only pay > for bounds-checked arrays if you want to pay for it. > I was meaning in a way which behaved more like a hybrid of Java-style arrays and raw pointers, and worked from C, rather than something like std::vector or std::array or similar, which has different semantics (the usual pointer fun doesn't work on them), and they require using C++... Or, if you mean doing something custom which can better approximate C style array/pointer semantics in C++, this could be doable. Granted, the big inescapable drawback with any of these options is that using them would come with a bit of a performance overhead (so may not ultimately solve all that much).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 14:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qk8hrh$ua3$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #67978 |
Rust is nice, but Rust has no exceptions. I wouldn't like to evaluate this combined error- and return-values after each function-call that might fail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 13:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qk8j2u$mv9$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #67997 |
In article <qk8hrh$ua3$1@news.albasani.net>, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >Rust is nice, but Rust has no exceptions. I wouldn't like to evaluate >this combined error- and return-values after each function-call that >might fail. > Why is this posted to CLC? Surely, the comparison is more valid to C++, given that C++ has things like exceptions and so on. It should have only been posted to CLC++. (Or, is there a parallel thread going on in CLC++ - that I am not (yet) aware of?) P.S. Of course there will be a blogs and stuff like this one (the one referred to in the OP) telling us that Rust is the next big thing and obviously the thing that is going to be just so absolutely neato keeno that you'll be unable to imagine how we ever got along with it. This is true for any new programming language. Look at it this way: If a new programming language came out and there was no blog post (or whatever) telling us with absolute authority that this is the absolute greatest thing since, well, ever - that language will have zero, zip, nada chance of ever being used by anyone. -- Pensacola - the thinking man's drink.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 15:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qk8kgg$s5p$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68000 |
>> Rust is nice, but Rust has no exceptions. I wouldn't like to evaluate >> this combined error- and return-values after each function-call that >> might fail. > Why is this posted to CLC? ... Why do you post another Follow-Up there if you consider this as inadequate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 20:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qkmhak$sp4$2@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #68000 |
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) spake the secret code
<qk8j2u$mv9$1@news.xmission.com> thusly:
>In article <qk8hrh$ua3$1@news.albasani.net>,
>Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Rust is nice, but Rust has no exceptions. I wouldn't like to evaluate
>>this combined error- and return-values after each function-call that
>>might fail.
>>
>
>Why is this posted to CLC? Surely, the comparison is more valid to
>C++, given that C++ has things like exceptions and so on. It should have
>only been posted to CLC++.
The author of the article barely mentions C++; instead all the
comparisons are to C.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 08:31 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <qkni7b$7r1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68179 |
On 3.09.2019 23:09, Richard wrote: > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] > > gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) spake the secret code > <qk8j2u$mv9$1@news.xmission.com> thusly: > >> In article <qk8hrh$ua3$1@news.albasani.net>, >> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Rust is nice, but Rust has no exceptions. I wouldn't like to evaluate >>> this combined error- and return-values after each function-call that >>> might fail. >>> >> >> Why is this posted to CLC? Surely, the comparison is more valid to >> C++, given that C++ has things like exceptions and so on. It should have >> only been posted to CLC++. > > The author of the article barely mentions C++; instead all the > comparisons are to C. This is because the low-level bugs presumably solved by Rust, like out-of-bounds access and memory leaks, are pretty much non-issues in C++. In C++, it is hard to get an out-of-bounds access with for(auto iter=container.begin(); iter!=container.end(); ++i) and even harder with for(auto& ref: container) Similarly, it is much harder to get a memory leak or access-after-destruction if there is not a single owning raw pointer (as produced by malloc() or new) in the program.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 16:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qkrel4$v22$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #68200 |
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> spake the secret code
<qkni7b$7r1$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
>On 3.09.2019 23:09, Richard wrote:
>> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) spake the secret code
>> <qk8j2u$mv9$1@news.xmission.com> thusly:
>>
>>> In article <qk8hrh$ua3$1@news.albasani.net>,
>>> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why is this posted to CLC? Surely, the comparison is more valid to
>>> C++, given that C++ has things like exceptions and so on. It should have
>>> only been posted to CLC++.
>>
>> The author of the article barely mentions C++; instead all the
>> comparisons are to C.
>
>This is because the low-level bugs presumably solved by Rust, like
>out-of-bounds access and memory leaks, are pretty much non-issues in C++.
Agreed. I find it interesting that all these proponents of other
languages keep pointing to problems that C++ has solved decades ago as
the reason why we need their language.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 13:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <98683515-26dc-4891-8664-b1208e957bb7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68230 |
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 12:55:10 PM UTC-4, Richard wrote: > > I find it interesting that all these proponents of other > languages keep pointing to problems that C++ has solved decades ago as > the reason why we need their language. We can dream of something better than C++ :-) Something less ad hoc and more aesthetically pleasing. Best regards, Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-06 02:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a741a1e3-6653-4ce6-9a6f-ac592d56b09b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68230 |
On Thursday, 5 September 2019 19:55:10 UTC+3, Richard wrote: > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] > > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> spake the secret code > <qkni7b$7r1$1@dont-email.me> thusly: > > >On 3.09.2019 23:09, Richard wrote: > >> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) spake the secret code > >> <qk8j2u$mv9$1@news.xmission.com> thusly: > >> > >>> In article <qk8hrh$ua3$1@news.albasani.net>, > >>> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Why is this posted to CLC? Surely, the comparison is more valid to > >>> C++, given that C++ has things like exceptions and so on. It should have > >>> only been posted to CLC++. > >> > >> The author of the article barely mentions C++; instead all the > >> comparisons are to C. > > > >This is because the low-level bugs presumably solved by Rust, like > >out-of-bounds access and memory leaks, are pretty much non-issues in C++. > > Agreed. I find it interesting that all these proponents of other > languages keep pointing to problems that C++ has solved decades ago as > the reason why we need their language. The issue is not solved in practice. All public repos are full of C++ code that compiles without warnings but leaks, violates bounds, uses potentially invalid iterators etc. Unsafe constructs are still well-formed and nothing helps to avoid usage of those (or to use these *only* in that 5% of code-base where less safe feature might improve perceived performance of whole product).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 08:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <almarsoft.8134279842288446008@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #67997 |
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:53:05 +0200, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > Rust is nice, but Rust has no exceptions. I wouldn't like to evaluate > this combined error- and return-values after each function-call that > might fail. That's Rust advantage. Returnig discriminated union is right way for handling errors. Rust has syntactic sugar in that. Latest proposal for c++ exceptions leans toeard that solution. -- Press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 08:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkag8d$gcn$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68012 |
> Returnig discriminated union is right way for handling errors. NO, that's a mess. Exceptions are by far more comfortable. The best variant are the distinction between checked and unchecked exceptions in Java.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 08:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkah19$fle$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68014 |
>> Returnig discriminated union is right way for handling errors. > NO, that's a mess. Exceptions are by far more comfortable. > The best variant are the distinction between checked and > unchecked exceptions in Java. And exceptions are more performant for the performance-relevant case that no exception is thrown with table-driven excepion-handling. The code-path that is processed when no exception is thrown is almost as efficient as if there isn't any exception-handling (nearly zero-over- head).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 10:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <almarsoft.4160850627477538964@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68015 |
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 08:51:21 +0200, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Returnig discriminated union is right way for handling errors. > > NO, that's a mess. Exceptions are by far more comfortable. > > The best variant are the distinction between checked and > > unchecked exceptions in Java. > And exceptions are more performant for the performance-relevant case > that no exception is thrown with table-driven excepion-handling. The > code-path that is processed when no exception is thrown is almost as > efficient as if there isn't any exception-handling (nearly zero-over- > head). Exceptions take space or time, there is no escape, and they are non deterministic... -- Press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 10:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkam3r$63e$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68018 |
>> And exceptions are more performant for the performance-relevant case >> that no exception is thrown with table-driven excepion-handling. The >> code-path that is processed when no exception is thrown is almost as >> efficient as if there isn't any exception-handling (nearly > zero-over- >> head). > Exceptions take space or time, there is no escape, and they are non > deterministic... Computers are always deterministic. ;-) But trowing exceptions is slow. But the case when we have a resouce- or I/O-collapse isn't performance-relevant, i.e. it doesn't matter if throwsing an exception lasts 10 or 1.000 clock-cycles.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web