this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
20 points (83.3% liked)
Rust Programming
8658 readers
1 users here now
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"Attacks".
The Caeser cipher used to be a valid cryptography method, and then it was not.
What does this imply? That the creator of C++ thought that their language would be the end all be all?
Tough news for them I guess, but no, it is not. On a long enough timeline, neither is Rust probably, but such is the price of innovation.
To call superior innovations an "attack" is one of the most folly things one can do.
Before someone asks what makes Rust superior, the very fact that the C++ creator is using the term "attack" here should very well be evidence enough, because it is an ad hominem fallacy. Instead of criticizing Rust, because they cannot find a valid way to, they choose instead to attack the character of Rust users.
It is always so weird to me that people literally seem to believe that complex inventions like programming languages are something we got to perfection within 20 (in C's case) or 30 (in C++'s case) years of the advent of our industry. Especially considering an iteration cycle is somewhere in the decade or longer range for these. I would expect this to improve for at least a couple of hundred years before we reach the point where nothing new can be added to existing programming languages that is worth starting over with a new language to reap the benefits.