Gregory's ServerIf you want to move fast and break things, Rust is the wrong language for the job. Rust is appropriate when your program needs to actually work correctly.
|
5 comments
 Don't be silly. If we thought Rust had no flaws, there never would have been a version 1.1, let alone 1.81. As for meeting users halfway, you're going to need to be specific about what limitations you've bumped into, before I can say anything meaningful about them.  @argv_minus_one @kornel I am not silly, I am not being taken seriously, and so I will not further address this topic. You are welcome to sell Rust with your condescension to someone else. Peace out.  @argv_minus_one @profdc9 @kornel And this is why everyone else dislike the rust evangelisation squad, nothing but condescending shallow talk, and dismissing others thoughts quickly from rote memorised arguements rather than actually talking with people..  |
@argv_minus_one @kornel Rust developers could address this problem, but they don't feel the need to meet prospective users halfway. It is their conceit that their way is the only right way that is repulsive to many prospective users.
This is not considering the idea that Rust may have flaws, the notion of the Rust community outright rejects. C++ is quite flawed but at least its deficiencies are recognized.
It is this attitude that makes many not want to adopt a language managed by fanatics.