People on Any Forums unironically believe that Rust is bad because it's used by couple of trannies...

People on Any Forums unironically believe that Rust is bad because it's used by couple of trannies, criticize something else.

Attached: 56279658681.png (900x534, 48.08K)

>

Attached: rust.webm (608x1080, 2.94M)

It's bad because it has terrible syntax. It also introduces greater mental load on the person programming with regards to passing and relinquishing ownership. At least with C/C++, the compiler didn't complain that you weren't unwrapping your boxed data structures in the wrong places or whatever.
For most people, auto GC provided by the JVM should suffice. Don't kid yourself that you need more, at least in a professional scenario.

imagine if that fish was thrice the size of a human and it ate you just like that

The syntax is ugly as fuck so I'm not interested in learning it. The people who go off on trans using it are trolling or they have middle school brain disease and are still trying to distance themselves from anything fem.

>It's bad because it has terrible syntax.
so does C++, it's overly complicated language and Rust is perfect replacement.

>It also introduces greater mental load on the person programming with regards to passing and relinquishing ownership. At least with C/C++, the compiler didn't complain that you weren't unwrapping your boxed data structures in the wrong places or whatever.
It decreases mental load because you shouldn't do that either way. In C and C++ you have to do the same checks in your head, in Rust you can just trust that the compiler will notice if you forget an edge case. This becomes really significant during code review, you don't have to check the exact properties of all used interfaces and can focus on the logic instead.
Bjarne Stroustrup of all people admitted that he doesn't use std::move because it's too error-prone. In Rust moves are the default and you simply can't use a moved-from value and everything's fine.

People have explained why Rust is bad several times. And just like trannies, Rust shills just ignore and deny reality and come back next thread to spew the same debunked hogwash.

>His brain cannot handle additional load

NGMI. Perhaps retail work is more of your speed user

OpenBASED

It's not worse than C++.

Any Forums being subversive

Make copypasta of your explanation. I'll make a counter-copypasta and we'll soon be able to wrap up these threads in five posts or so.

>Rust tranny is so retarded xhe has to be fed a copypasta
4 megabyte binaries, 30 seconds first compile time

We all agree Rust syntax is horrible. Here's a list of the major problems and how to fix them, and then maybe people will actually use it someday.
1. No block expressions. No implicit returns. Use the fucking keyword.
2. Take the colon out of declaration syntax. remove the question mark operator. Give us a real ternary operator.
3. Take the "!" out of macros. They should look exactly like function calls.
4. Take the pipe bullshit out of closures. Use balanced delimiters.
5. Take out the "::" that sometimes appears when using templates. There is no reason for having this.
6. Fix all the keywords that were renamed for no reason: "match" = "switch," "let" = "auto," "()" = "void," and so on.
7. Replace the stupid "=>" operator with real case labels so IDEs can actually highlight them.
8. Make mutability the default. Use explicit const for immutable variables and references.
9. Put the type before the variable, not after.
10. Remove the pointless "fn" keyword. It's redundant.
11. Put template parameters before the associated declaration instead of mixing them in with a bunch of other stuff where it's impossible to read.
12. Change "self" back to "this" and make it implicit.
13. Struct fields should be defined with the same syntax as declaring variables.
14. Remove "impl Bar for Foo." You should be able to see all the interfaces a type inherits from at the declaration site.
15. Remove "impl Foo." Methods should be defined inside the struct body, or declared there and defined at the top level.
16. Make parentheses mandatory in if/while/for statements. Make braces optional.
17. Bring back the three-part for loop syntax. There are things that simply can't be expressed without it.
18. Make lifetimes completely invisible. They're implicit some of the time. Make them implicit all of the time, or just remove them. If the compiler can't make this work without a bunch of arcane symbols the programmer has to type, there is no point even having the feature.

Rust syntax is clear and concise to me. Glad it filters tards like you.

>Any Forums is one person

C++ has much worse syntax. Complex templates are straight up unreadable and so are function pointers etc.
There is just about as much mental load in it as in C++. The only difference is that Rust compiler will tell you when you made a mistake while on C++ you can only realize it when your program crashes in an unexpected way in runtime. Also Rust allows you to express a lot of invariants in the type system while C++ requires you to keep all of that in your head.

>For most people, auto GC provided by the JVM should suffice. Don't kid yourself that you need more, at least in a professional scenario.
Both C++ and Rust are systems programming languages. If you do systems programming you can't just replace it with GC and JVM.

>terrible syntax
can you retards fuck off? you don't even know what good syntax is if it hit you in the face. Probably never wrote a parser in your lives you dumb fucking chimps.

>Give us a real ternary operator.
you were retarded out of the gate, but this is where I stopped reading. You literally do not know what you're talking about at all and it's painfully obvious. go back to school kiddo.

If that's the case, why don't we ever see prominent rust projects, most of which are simplistic terminal tools or C/stdlib wrappers, worked on by dozens of unemployable autists (ie. troons) with all the free time in the world, move at anything more than a glacial pace?