logoalt Hacker News

giancarlostoroyesterday at 6:16 PM3 repliesview on HN

Don't hate me for this, but... is 20 years of Rust really new?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_(programming_language)

I do get what you mean, but Rust has been baking for a decade, finally took off after 10 years of baking, and now that is been repeatedly tried and tested it is eating the world, as some developers suggested it could eventually do so. I however do think this shows a different problem:

If nobody writes unit tests, how do you write them when you port over projects to ensure your new language doesn't introduce regressions. All rewrites should be preceded by strong useful unit tests.


Replies

UI_at_80x24yesterday at 7:19 PM

But the 90s was only 20-years ago!

lol, you got me. Stupid old brain not calculating time correctly.

show 1 reply
9rxyesterday at 6:21 PM

Ideally, but if a project wasn't written with tests at the time then finding a working time machine can be a challenge. If you try to add them later you won't capture all the nuance that went into the original program. After all, if the implementation code was expressive enough to capture that nuance, you'd already have your test suite, so to speak. Tests are written to fill in the details that the rest of the code isn't able to express.

throw384748yesterday at 6:25 PM

Rust does not even have a specification, and stable release yet! You are lucky if current version, compiles two years old code!

Rust will be "repeatedly tried and tested" maybe in year 2040!

show 2 replies