Comment by BuckRogers | Hacker News Reader

Comment by BuckRogers | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Downplaying Rust isn’t going to go over well in this thread. I happen to completely agree with you, but I would add or say that Rust is the first new programming language in a very long time that qualifies as technical innovation and not technical churn. Maybe the only one since Java. And I'm a C# guy, I wouldn't want to use anything else, it's Java done right. But standing back and looking at the big list[0], only C, Java and probably Rust qualify as true technical innovation. I'm not saying that's the only thing that matters either. Everything has its contributions, but I'm not sure many rise to my standard of technical innovation (solving a problem), and most are pure churn.

Rust solves a real problem that has plagued software for decades (or so I'm told, I'm not a Rust user), but that can be true while everything else you said is also true. I don't plan on picking up Rust either, and yes a combo like C#/C(++) is incredibly potent, and Rust is ages away from replacing C.

A language ends up being the sum of its parts though. C# is "write once, jobs everywhere". Great serverside platform with .NET 5. Native on the most popular desktop platform, produces iOS apps and games. It's industrial-strength in language design. Good IDE support, good backwards compatibility (or side by side support). And also importantly, like my experience writing Python, I enjoy writing C#.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_programming_langua...

I do consultancy across Java, .NET and C++ stacks.

There are definitly a couple of things that .NET is catching up with the Java world and could learn from.

Rust is briging ATS and Cyclone ideas into mainstream, and as those ideas prove correct, other languages are improving their type systems to support them as well.

For example D, Swift, Haskell, Chapel, Ada.

> And I'm a C# guy, I wouldn't want to use anything else, it's Java done right.

It has colored functions. Every async function is turned by the compiler into a class with an embedded FSM. Async is viral in C#, so much so that even main() had to be made async. So, no, it's not Java done right.

Java done wrong? I've always been a Java/C# person, that's the general programming abstraction layer I've spent most of my education and career in and prefer it. I greatly prefer C# (and all that comes with it) over Java. But if C# didn't exist, I would probably prefer Java over all other alternatives. The only reason I'd fall onto Javascript upon C#'s disappearance would be because most of my experience is in web, but definitely not due to the ecosystem or language. So from a language/ecosystem perspective, Java is my 2nd choice, I never hated Java, it's popular for good reasons.

I like C# a lot (internal classes, yield, etc.) except for their async implementation. I believe Java's Project Loom will prove to be the superior solution.

I'd likely agree with you, mostly on the grounds that by default being late and learning from earlier implementations always helps.

> Downplaying Rust isn’t going to go over well in this thread.

People were downvoting the OP not because they were criticizing Rust, but they were off-topic. The article is about Rust async; OPs comment is about Rust.

Some have suggested that, but I never minded general takes on a given language when the thread is about a specific feature. I think the majority would be with me on this, maybe not, but he did receive upvotes again. There are few enough language version release threads that there's nowhere else for people to share their opinions, for me it's appropriate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com