Hacker News Reader

Comment by hu3 | Hacker News Reader

And until then someone might create a more ergonomic evolution of Rust.

> And until then someone might create a more ergonomic evolution of Rust.

I wouldn't discount Rust's ability to create a more ergonomic evolution of Rust, because they already have. A few times. See: Polonius, https://github.com/rust-lang/polonius, and NLL, https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2094-nll.html

This is a thing I've been wondering about for a while. How many people are exploring the general design space of safety, but from the ground up, so that they aren't tied to the set of design decisions Rust made? At one point MS had Verona but I have not heard anything about it in years so no clue if it is still actively being worked on/explored.

Rust is a good language IMO, but the industry cannot just stop there and decide this is good enough. Even with ideas like editions, there's a level of breakage Rust isn't going to do.

Ada?

In my opinion, Ada needs some better tooling to become accessible.

Though I'll have to give the Ada LSP a go again, hoping that it plays nicely with JetBrains' suite.

>> And until then someone might create a more ergonomic evolution of Rust. > Ada?

Um what? Which is to say -- how is Ada more ergonomic, if ergonomic means "relating to or designed for efficiency and comfort in the working environment"? I'm curious about what advantages Ada has there.

Ada has a more traditional syntax compared to Rust, for good or for bad.

> Ada has a more traditional syntax compared to Rust, for good or for bad.

How do you mean? "Traditional" in the sense that Pascal and Ada are old, and Rust is not? Rust may be ML in C's clothing, but isn't C's clothing more ergonomic for most C/C++ types?

I wished Rust had developed as an ML in Pascal/Ada's clothing but as you said it would not have been ergonomic for C/C++ folks and probably not as successful as it is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com