Has anyone made study of difference between Rust and Ada for low level hardware
system software?
Since Ada is mainly used in this area, why has Rust, which is much
younger language, and target this same area has gained so much
popularity but not Ada?
https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3551349.3559494
"Rust is a rising programming language designed to build system
software [4, 10, 20]. On the one hand, Rust offers access to and control
of the low-level system resources. On the other hand,
unlike conventional systems programming languages, Rust
ensures memory and concurrency safety"
"Rust often inserts bound checks at the execution time to rule
out out-of-bound accesses"
Well, does not Ada also "ensures memory and concurrency safety"
and checks for out-of-bound accesses?
I am just wondering what does Rust brings to the table that
Ada does not have and why is Rust becoming so popular when
Ada is not.
What for? Any language comparisons lost their meaning long ago as the
whole language business degraded into hobbyist/corporate bullshit.
Since Ada is mainly used in this area, why has Rust, which is much
younger language, and target this same area has gained so much
popularity but not Ada?
Because it is always someone's arbitrary decision.
Then of course Rust continues the worst practices tried by Ada and C++: templates/generics, macros.
Has anyone made study of difference between Rust and Ada for low level hardware
system software?
On 13/12/2023 08:27, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
Then of course Rust continues the worst practices tried by Ada and
C++: templates/generics, macros.
What's the alternative to generics?
Since Ada is mainly used in this area, why has Rust, which is much
younger language, and target this same area has gained so much
popularity but not Ada?
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 379 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 44:54:00 |
Calls: | 8,141 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 13,085 |
Messages: | 5,858,057 |