Another one:
- Generics in every language: Vector<MyType>()

- Rust:

Nope:
Vec<u32>::new();

This works:
Vec::<u32>::new();

And this ALSO works:
(Vec <u32)>::new();

So I can't use the universal language of: Vec<u32>::new();

But I can do (Vec <u32)>::new();

#Rust #rustlang

What kind of syntax is that? For the past 28yrs I used more than 12+ langs in every kind of project & the ugliest language I've seen is Rust.

Yes, EVEN UGLIER THAN ERLANG, at least Erlang is consistent and makes sense.

DREAM:
- Systems programming language w/ the safety of Rust
- a package manager
- the ecosystem/community size of Rust
- C/C++ tooling (debugger and LS)
- C/C++ interop
- ALL OF THAT with a Ruby-like syntax

The answer could be Crystal, but unfortunately it has a tiny tiny ecosystem and Windows is a 2nd class citizen and Crystal has probably the slowest compiler on Earth.

Nim is probably the answer (it's Pascal-like), but Nim loses on tooling.

Other suggestions?

#Nim #NimLang #Rust #RustLang

@mo8it oh no problem with Rust's LS.

The main point is that I want: "ALL OF THAT with a Ruby-like syntax"

@alfredbaudisch For me personally, although I had experience in C++, I did not like the syntax of Rust at the beginning. I wished a syntax like that of Python or Julia.

But this picture is the best description of my experience:

https://infosec.exchange/@AstraKernel/109628938569008449

After understanding more of the concepts behind the syntax (for example lifetimes etc.), I do appreciate the syntax. At the end, a statically typed general purpose language that can be used as a low level one can not look like Python or Ruby.