Hacker News Reader

Comment by greyman | Hacker News Reader

Could I have a tangential question: I did learn what is Rust for, but if there is a steep learning curve, it is that much better comparing to C++? I worked about 15 years professionally in C++, it's a solid language, and it is used by many open source projects and companies as well. You can also do "anything" in it, like in Rust, and the abstractions don't incur performance penalties.

View on HN

Are you one of the three people in the world who can write C++ code without security holes? If not, I'd say it's worth it. That was half joking. :)

The half serious answer I can give is: Do you have a job offer you want to take or at least a solid plan how you can use it professionally? There are so many C++ jobs, that you can most likely find another one that meets all your other requirements (location, salary, domain, etc.), should you decide to leave your current one. I don't think that is the case for Rust yet (But I'm rooting for it! :)

The second point is also my answer for OP.

Yes the second point is exactly what I was getting at - how exactly is Rust so much better that it justifies to learn it instead of C++. (but I don't imply it isn't, just curious to see some real points).

AFAIK, the design goals of Rust are better security and correctness in general, than C++. Have you looked at Rust and decided that it does not achieve that goal?

If I'm starting my own project, then I can pick the language that I think gives me a better shot at security and correctness. If Rust is better than C++ at that, and if that's my criterion for picking a language, then knowing Rust opens new doors for me.

If someone hires me to work on a project, in the current state of affairs, they're much more likely to have picked C++ than Rust, and I don't get the choice (other than choosing whether to take the job). Rust doesn't (yet) open that many doors for me as an employee.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com