Rust is harder than C++ because it nitpicks your code and it has less libraries available

Rust is harder than C++ because it nitpicks your code and it has less libraries available.
You guys have been played.

Attached: Rust_programming_language_black_logo.svg.png (800x800, 25.42K)

Im ok with the last line

>less libraries available.
Most code is shit anyway.

how does having less libraries makes it harder ?
not having to deal with memory leak and having a proper package manager makes it easier for a beginner

You mean no legacy stuff from 1997?

>Rust is harder than C++
This is a good thing. Rust keeps out the retards that can't get past the compiler.
>it has less libraries available
Eh... I'd be willing to believe this, given the age of C++, but do you have a hard number on the amount of C++ libraries?

>This is a good thing. Rust keeps out the retards that can't get past the compiler.
Thats false. Rust is swarming with retards and its already such a dependencies cluster fuck.

If you are a retard you cannot keep using Rust.
You need real brain power to be using it.

>and its already such a dependencies cluster fuck.
You know if C++ supposedly has more libraries than Rust, you'd think they wouldn't be making these kinds of arguments. Because they'd actually be using those libraries.

Still not learning Rust.

Attached: undefined.png (657x527, 261.69K)

who ask

Well C++ is not like javascript I think
It doesn't have a million libraries for everything under the sun
It has like a few dozen of libraries that are massive
Stuff like boost, qt, opencv, etc...
And we'll the ecosystem for gaming is massive.
Rust seems to have some good cryptography libraries and is technically better for webdev which is why it's used in crypto I think. Bitcoin was written in C++ though.

come back after you delt with 10 years of c++ production code lmao

95% of retardation on Any Forums is just unexperience speaking

Rust favors smaller libraries, which are arguably more of a clusterfuck.
Rust has no boost equivalent because it's easy to just use twenty individual libraries for all the little things you want.
This is unrelated to how much library code there is in total.

Learn c

no

>which are arguably more of a clusterfuck
Eh... I honestly think smaller libraries are more worth it. In every library, there's functions that aren't part of the public API, which need to be used to implement that library. In a smaller library ecosystem, those functions could themselves be provided by a library and imported as subdependencies. And if you have multiple dependencies that share a subdependency, you don't have to link that function twice. So ultimately you save space.

The fact that a lot of Rust libraries also happen to be highly composable with one another is also pretty nice from a usability perspective.

There's not enough data points for 10 years of rust in production to make this argument.

Attached: 1656448254512.png (720x864, 453.5K)

I literally use Rust because C++ scares me.

I use Rust because I liked C++, and Rust is C++ with all of the annoying parts removed.

Jokes aside, I'm learning Rust because I can't make myself deal with building C+. The language seems fine but the absolute atrocity of building it has kept me out