@ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 2 days agoIt's official, Rust is an anti C/C++ elitist slurlemmy.worldimagemessage-square91fedilinkarrow-up1395arrow-down132
arrow-up1363arrow-down1imageIt's official, Rust is an anti C/C++ elitist slurlemmy.world@ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 2 days agomessage-square91fedilink
minus-square@CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilink4•edit-215 hours agoHmm. So I guess it comes down to what OP is doing. They either want to write a Rust library, or something that uses a Rust library that may not be standardised or even exist yet. If the latter, they should stick with C.
minus-square@barsoap@lemm.eelinkfedilink3•2 days agoWriting C bindings to a Rust library is the easier scenario because you can rely on the safe code having nice and clean memory semantics.
Hmm. So I guess it comes down to what OP is doing. They either want to write a Rust library, or something that uses a Rust library that may not be standardised or even exist yet. If the latter, they should stick with C.
Writing C bindings to a Rust library is the easier scenario because you can rely on the safe code having nice and clean memory semantics.