My favorite, since I’m not a programmer anymore, is excel
E: Your formula has a circular reference. I ain’t doing shit till you fix it
Me: where?
E: In your spreadsheet, I don’t fucking know
It’s ok, you run the expression debugger, which says the first step, which is all of the formula, will result in an error. So helpful.
Then there’s Haskell that would remove (well, used to at some point) your source code file if you made any errors: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/163
The world’s angriest compiler.
So that’s what inspired Vigil…
One of the reasons i started learning rust was bc of how easy it is to get into it, or at least that’s how it felt for me. It wasn’t until a few months into consistently writing that I started to encounter things that I didn’t understand.
The good thing about Rust is that if you have no idea of any problem in your code, it very likely because your code is ok.
On C++ things are different.
Rust is nice, unless you have a traits compilation error from a 3rd party library using types that are more difficult to write than C++ templates.
yeah as nice as it is what you can achieve with trait-bounds there are definitely trade-offs, being compile time and error messages, and sometimes mental complexity, understanding what the trait-bounds exactly mean… I really hope, that this area gets improvement on at least the error-messages and compile time (incremental cached type-checking via something like salsa)
I much prefer getting told of that it doesn’t match a trait than get 600 characters of which the majority is implementation detail of global allocators und from what exactly the string is derived.
Depends on what trait bound error messages you have had yet, I had 1000 lines long already, where it’s not obvious at all what is meant (and is often a very simple fix). But I’m sure this will get better over time, there’s already a bigger ongoing redesign of the type system solver, so maybe it will be integrated into stable rust soon.
Way too short to be a real C++ error. Needs a few more pages of template gibberish.
Syntax error: unmatched thing in thing from std::nonstd::__map<_Cyrillic, _$$$dollars>const basic_string< epic_mystery,mongoose_traits, __default_alloc_>(from James Mickens’ The Night Watch, highly recommended with his other essays: https://mickens.seas.harvard.edu/wisdom-james-mickens)
Template>, Outer>>>::static_wrapper, spirit::parser::lever>::fuck_you
MySQL: you have an error near here.
Me: What’s the error?
MySQL: It’s near here.
Me: You’re not going to tell me what the error is? Okay, near where? Here?
MySQL: warmer… warmer…
Oracle: You have this error in line 1
User: Hey, no, there isn’t anything to cause this error in line 1
Oracle: I’m telling you, it’s in line 1
User: Hum… How many lines are in my 10 lines query?
Oracle: 1
Sounds like Rust propaganda to me >:(
Tbf, you have to be pretty far with Rust to get to a point where Rust’s compiler errors stop helping you (at least, as far as I’ve seen). After that, it’s pretty much the same
Yep use a little bit more deeply cascaded generic rust code with a lot of fancy trait-bounds and error messages will explode and be similar as C++ (though to be fair they are still likely way more helpful than C++ template based error messages). Really hope that the compiler/error devs will improve in this area
deleted by creator
Would know, I’ve never had a runtime error in Rust /s
Can’t have a runtime error if you don’t have a compiled binary *taps forehead*
(For the record, I say this as someone who enjoys Rust)
This is actually unironically a major benefit of Rust - compile time errors are supposed to be for dev mistakes and runtime errors supposed to be for user mistakes. Way easier to debug something at compile time instead of runtime.
‘it should pretty much never segfault’ uh, isn’t that the entire point of Rust? Unless you’re counting failing a bounds check as a segfault
Yeah, but which one i cooler?
Rust because having a package manager is important.
Even C has a package manager
C just shrugs and says “Seg Fault.”
Have you tried segmenting in a non-faulty way?
Probably forgot a semicolon
This joke is never funny; Forgetting a semicolon in c results in compile time errors, not runtime errors
