<story><title>Rust 2019 and beyond: limits to some growth</title><url>https://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/263429.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jacquesm</author><text>That is a super mature post whose content should be read by any language and&amp;#x2F;or eco-system component (libraries, frameworks and so on) creators and maintainers.&lt;p&gt;I love the intentionally limited scope and the amount of thought that went into writing this, and I wished I had the clarity required to be able to do this. Especially the bit about &amp;#x27;negative space&amp;#x27; got my intention, that&amp;#x27;s one tool I&amp;#x27;m going to put in my toolbox to re-use. And there already is one example from a company whose founder I knew that made serious bank on just knowing what they were not, so this advice has applicability far outside of computer programming language design.&lt;p&gt;Thanks for posting this.</text></comment>
<story><title>Rust 2019 and beyond: limits to some growth</title><url>https://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/263429.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>CJefferson</author><text>I can&amp;#x27;t agree more with this. I am a long time c++ dev, been to c++ committee meetings. The language is too complicated and inconsistent, and that is now I believe unfixable. I believe no one understands it. New features keep arriving, but you still have to learn everything that came before, for older codebases.&lt;p&gt;For example, {} style initalisers were added to simplify and &amp;quot;unify&amp;quot; things. Except to make a vector of length 3 you still need to use the old style (3) notation. So now there is just one more thing to learn.&lt;p&gt;It is much easier to add &amp;quot;one more thing&amp;quot; to a language than it is to later take it out.</text></comment>