> It's like C, but not C? I love it.
I believe more appropriate is comparing it to C++ since Rust is a higher level language than C.
I believe more appropriate is comparing it to C++ since Rust is a higher level language than C.
When I said "It's like C, but not C" I meant that it can be used for the same applications as C but it doesn't have most of the shortcomings of C itself.
You can do those things in C++ as well.
For a while C++ was a superset of C. It was basically C with OO and high level data structures.
That's what rust provides as well.
[1]: https://drewdevault.com/2019/03/25/Rust-is-not-a-good-C-repl...
(And all of the previous posts he’s made on this subject)
But the line some people espouse is “Rust is a new C++ not a new C and C programmers who don’t like C++ would never like Rust,” and while some folks do feel that way, it isn’t universal. That’s all I’m saying.
C programmers are numerous and in a variety of fields doing all sorts of things, pretending you can speak about this stuff as though there’s a monolith of opinion is a category error, in my opinion.
Oh, okay. I understand the point you're making.