When I converted code from C to Rust, I was left with much more code.
Are you just noting specifics, or was it your experience that there was less Rust required for a full C to Rust conversion?
-5 karma · joined March 13, 2021
Are you just noting specifics, or was it your experience that there was less Rust required for a full C to Rust conversion?
But it’s not just taking care of those things that must be done; it seems to bloat the code.
I think it’s a great alternative to C for large apps like Firefox, and perhaps it’s a good alternative to Go for services.
For general purpose, I personally want something fast that’s easy, clear, and concise like Ruby.
Do I just accept that Rust is the most evolved version of C, or is my gut correct that it’s bloated? Is it a good choice for general purpose as-is?
Since then I’ve realized that our brains are like lenses; learning to code re-wires your brain to read code, which is different than other types of data, similar to the way that reading a book is a different interface than examining a room; just as we may choose to read certain authors or subjects, or may not think of the same things when examining a room, we may choose to see code in styles or certain languages, or may consider value in clarity of code or in its function.
I value clarity, but upon considering the room again, the first dimension is function, next clarity. This doesn’t subdue clarity to a trivial role, but clarity is a third order to maintainability, which is second order to executability.
Over time, those lenses may not be as agile as before, though we expect them to be. Text is blurred, and we may struggle to hold the glasses at a distance to read a certain part of the code clearly. It no longer makes sense, and that which employs us sees other value.