Note: You can click "context" on that comment. It is 100% intended to be a joke. It's in response to Manish, who undoubtedly knows Sage (and vice versa); it's not a mocking at all.
- It's still easy to misinterpret in divisive ways.
- As I've said before...
quotes are, by definition, taken out of context. Thus, regardless of how good it is in context, it's of questionable suitability for a QOTW.
Feel free to like other comments? It's not like I'm forcing anyone to vote for it
I feel like, the way Reddit links posts without visible context by default is causing confusion here. This is the link to the comment with context. (Starting with some deleted post whose contents we can only guess.) The quoted response here was 4 comments deep in a joke discussion between Sage and Manishearth.
Click to show quoted full discussion
That being said, I would personally agree that perhaps a (self-described) shitpost is not necessarily the best quote of the week… even more so if it’s heavily contextual
or look up on archive sites… ↩︎
- procmacroable /ˌprɔkˈmækroʊəbəl/ a. Implementable as a procedural macro.
(Mara on GitHub)
That said, I really like the language. It’s as if someone set out to design a programming language, and just picked all the right answers. Great ecosystem, flawless cross platform, built-in build tools, no “magic”, static binaries, performance-focused, built-in concurrency checks. Maybe these “correct” choices are just laser-targeted at my soul, but in my experience, once you leap over the initial hurdles, it all just works™️, without much fanfare.
"The goal isn’t to have an eternally good programming languages; the goal is to have tools now."
from Rust: A New Attempt at C++'s Main Goal :: The Coded Message by Jimmy Hartzell
As the Captain Anton Fetisov once said,
(the rest of the paragraph is good too, but cut like this is just too good of a cultural reference to miss)
Thanks to all for the very helpful responses. "The Book" says The community is very welcoming and happy to answer students’ questions "; I expected that to be just marketing, but I was wrong.
"That's one of the great things about Rust: sometimes you can do something really dumb and get away with it."
-- Rik Arends at RustNL, talking about code optimization or the lack thereof
I do wish that people could see Rust as more than a better C/C++. It's an amazing language for web services and CLIs.
It's not just that it doesn't have a GC. It also doesn't have some of the worst features of OOP, it also has a sane std library, it also has an expressive type system, etc. Rust helps you write better code, even when compared to languages like Java or Python.
That is an odd comparison to me. Java does very little to help write better code, Python even less. A comparison to something like Ada would be more fitting.
This is what I get for taking a quote out of context
The parent comment compared Rust to C/C++; the one I quoted argues that Rust shines not only as a C/C++ replacement, but also when compared to higher level languages and applied to tasks where you wouldn't typically be reaching for C/C++ (web services).
...some people found error messages they couldn't ignore more annoying than wrong results, and, when judging the relative merits of programming languages, some still seem to equate "the ease of programming" with the ease of making undetected mistakes.
On the foolishness of "natural language programming", E.W. Dijkstra
It was a public post and making joke using a marginalized community.
Due to the nature of this thread, I think it's best to – if possible – avoid answering to posts too far back
These open-source projects show that Rust provides both high performance and pace of development while also attracting a lot of contributors. There is a long-standing tradition of developing tooling for a programming language using that language. Rust breaks from this tradition quite effectively.
There are a few other possible quotes in the article, worth reading in full.
Yeah. I spaced out and didn't notice the date.