Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 1
Comments 218
"No way to prevent this" say users of only language where this regularly happens - 07/01/2024
  • The trope will be "old" once the mainstream view is no longer that C-style memory management is "good enough".

    That said, this particular vulnerability was primarily due to how signals work, which I understand to be kind of unavoidably terrible in any language.

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • I'm honestly not convinced JavaScript is good even for the front-end, because it's intentionally designed to swallow, ignore, and otherwise minimize errors; which is not helpful at all for development of any software. My point is that the only reason JavaScript is dominant in front-end development is that, prior to WASM, it was literally the only option; if that hadn't been the case, I doubt it would have become nearly so widely used.

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • C++11 also introduced new problems, such as the strange interaction between brace-initialization and initializer-lists (though that was partially fixed several years later), and the fairly arcane rules around move semantics with minimal compiler support (for example, it would be great if the standard required compilers to emit an error if a moved-from object were accessed).

    I know Lisp is minimal, I'm just saying that I expect there are Lisp fans who won't acknowledge (or would excuse) any shortcomings in the language, just as there are C++ fans who do the same for C++.

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • Sounds like we're actually in agreement about most of this.

    I'm okay with languages limiting their "expressive" power in order to provide stronger correctness guarantees or just limit how "weird" code looks; but this is largely because I've worked on many projects where someone had written a heap of difficult-to-understand code, and I doubt such limitations would be appealing if I were working strictly on my own.

    I also don't really see the appeal of Java-style inheritance, but to be honest I didn't use Scala for long enough to know whether or not I agree that Scala does inheritance "right".

    It does make sense that Rust provides mutability in some cases where Scala doesn't. Rust's superpower, enabled by the borrow checker, is effectively "safe mutability." I hope other, simpler languages build on this invention.

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • I don't really like the title either, but the article does demonstrate how unfortunate it is that we're effectively locked in to using the ABI at some level of nearly every piece of software.

    That said, there definitely were languages with better type systems prior to the invention of C. Pascal is a frequently-cited example.

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is. I realize that you can almost completely avoid JavaScript, but the point I'm making is merely that there is a real technical limitation that limits the choices developers can make for front-end code, and although WASM is making great strides in breaking down that barrier (something I've been thrilled to see happen, but which is going much more slowly than I had hoped), the limitation is still there. Conversely, such a barrier has never existed on the backend, except in the sense that C limits what all other languages can do.

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • Ehhh, I mean this more strongly. I've never met people more in denial about language design problems than C++ adherents. (Though admittedly I haven't spent much time talking to Lisp fans about language design.)

  • Stop comparing programming languages
  • Oof, slow compile times to target, of all things, the JVM? Implicit methods? Some(null)? Function call syntax where the difference between a tuple argument and a sequence of non-tuple arguments can be determined by whether or not there's a space before the parentheses?

    There are definitely some major issues with Scala.

  • Who's working on a "smaller Rust"?

    Almost five years ago, Saoirse "boats" wrote "Notes on a smaller Rust", and a year after that, revisited the idea.

    The basic idea is a language that is highly inspired by Rust but doesn't have the strict constraint of being a "systems" language in the vein of C and C++; in particular, it can have a nontrivial (or "thick") runtime and doesn't need to limit itself to "zero-cost" abstractions.

    What languages are being designed that fit this description? I've seen a few scripting languages written in Rust on GitHub, but none of them have been very active. I also recently learned about Hylo, which does have some ideas that I think are promising, but it seems too syntactically alien to really be a "smaller Rust."

    Edit to add: I think Graydon Hoare's post about language design choices he would have preferred for Rust also sheds some light on the kind of things a hypothetical "Rust-like but not Rust" language could do differently: