Too close to home

Oh and .clone()

And .copy()
- .copy()?

I thought it was randomly adding Send and Sync traits to function signatures until rustc is happy.

That too
- Randomly wrapping things in Arc::new()

This was me in courses that used C. Keep adding and removing * and & until the IDE was happy and it usually worked.

Ah the good old times with C, when things were much more simple (but unsafe...)
- (void*) flashbacks intensify.

I'm gonna have to borrow this book

Me too. I also want to make some changes to it at the same time.
- Better apply for a mutable library card now before someone else does

Hahaha yes tfw Rust forces you to put your shit in a Rc<Cell<Option<>>>

New your program deadlocks instead of crashing, peak safety.
- EVERYBODY STOP. Nobody make a move or the memory dies. We have a Mexican Memory Standoff.

Follow up of: "Mmm... should I put lifecycle annotation in these 10 structs or just use and Rc and call it a day?". Rc and Box FTW.

So... now the rustc borrow checker is the new video game boss that is nearly impossible to beat for newcomers, right?

I think that's the only thing I dislike about rust. Not having to use * to dereference but later having to use is tad confusing. I know it's still clever solution but in this case I prefer c++'s straightforward consistency.

Using ampersand never was problematic for me.

C++ does have the problem that references are not objects, which introduces many subtle issues. For example, you cannot use a type like std::vector<int&>, so that templated code will often have to invoke std::remove_reference<T> and so on. Rust opts for a more consistent data model, but then introduces auto-deref (and the Deref trait) to get about the same usability C++ has with references and operator->. Note that C++ will implicitly chain operator-> calls until a plain pointer is reached, whereas Rust will stop dereferencing once a type with a matching method/field is found. Having deep knowledge of both languages, I'm not convinced that C++ features "straightforward consistency" here…

Replace that with golang and now we’re talking

Yeah, popped in the comments to say the same.
I dont know what my damage is with pointers…
- honestly with Go in general I’m in a perpetual cycle of being annoyed with it and then immediately being amazed when I find some little trick for efficiency - with stringer interfaces and the like

Same for C, & yields a pointer to a value, and * allows you to access the data. (For rust people, a pointer is like a reference with looser type checking)

We have pointers in Rust, too :) see documentation
- I doubt many people have ever use that or any of the other low level memory API. The main appeal of rust is not having to do that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co3ewqQlX-8

The actual video, not the reaction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGfQu0bQTKc
- Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=TGfQu0bQTKc
  Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
  I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=co3ewqQlX-8
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.