It’s a very valuable thing to be able to separate the mental model one uses from the target machine language.
I worry about the more ardent Rust enthusiasts because it seems popular in those circles to embrace an attitude that we’ve somehow arrived at the right conceptual framework.
Rust is a competent, pragmatic embedding of a few of the big ideas from serious PLT into a well-optimized C++ compiler toolchain, and it’s cool and useful as a result.
But I hope to God it’s not the endgame on fast ML/Haskell/Lisp.
I'd be disappointed if the best language people are writing software in when I retire (perhaps a decade or at most two in the future) is Rust. We can surely do better.
But I'd be even more disappointed if the best language people are writing software in when I retire isn't even Rust.
To be successful a language still has to be approachable to most dev. I just hope you are not conflating PLT with Functional. Look what functionalist did to Scala... It had an interesting balance and they destroyed it.
I worry about the more ardent Rust enthusiasts because it seems popular in those circles to embrace an attitude that we’ve somehow arrived at the right conceptual framework.
Rust is a competent, pragmatic embedding of a few of the big ideas from serious PLT into a well-optimized C++ compiler toolchain, and it’s cool and useful as a result.
But I hope to God it’s not the endgame on fast ML/Haskell/Lisp.