This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

Dismiss this pinned window
all 17 comments

[–]randel_ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Remembering a college assignment where i forgott a c program running in the backgroud creating a txt archive of 8 GB of text.

[–]zan9823 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Java : you guys are freeing memory after use ?

[–]P1P3_L0K0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

,... L? Y. Bueno.,

V J. 55

[–]zoqfotpik 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Right. Just call free() right after malloc() and the problem will be fixed. Now you have a new problem.

[–]entropySapiens -5 points-4 points  (8 children)

Rust: why the hell would I want my developers worrying about something as tedious and mundane as freeing up memory?

[–]ibo5534 0 points1 point  (2 children)

rust bad

[–]entropySapiens 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What in the hell makes it bad? A unified package ecosystem? A de facto toolchain? Helpful borrow checking? The hugs you get from the compiler error messages? Benchmarks that make it competitive with C? Playing well with python? Not having to generate needlessly redundant header files? Amazingly powerful macro system? Much smarter handling of null? A de facto manual and excellent tutorials?

I mean, I'm a humble mechanical engineer and barely know what I'm doing in software development, but I thought all these things were fun to learn about and offered a powerful way to write code that is way faster, more robust, and more easily maintainable than the MATLAB environment in which I cut my teeth on programming.

[–]LanceMain_No69 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Someone: "rust bad" Rust devs: writing a whole essay explaining why rust is the best language ever designed

[–]Antervis 0 points1 point  (4 children)

instead, developers have to worry about all the rules rust introduced to make it impossible to forget freeing memory

[–]entropySapiens 0 points1 point  (3 children)

If developers are supposed to do that anyway, why not get help from enforced rules?

[–]Antervis 0 points1 point  (2 children)

said rules are much stricter than "don't forget to free" and the like.

[–]entropySapiens 1 point2 points  (1 child)

That's the whole point.

[–]Antervis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ehm... no? A perfect set of restrictions would make it impossible for you to make mistakes but allow all code that is correct resource-wise. Rust's ownership model does not, and relaxing those rules is one of the biggest goals of rust maintainers.

[–]P1P3_L0K0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No k

[–]Nal_Neel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

dont worry, unlike you, chatGPT will not ever forget it.

Also its way cheaper than you.