Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "C is 50 Years Old. Should You Learn Rust?" video.

  1. So basically C++. I would argue that C needs to have its own scope related lifetime mechanisms, which you can already do manually anyway, but C needs some syntactic sugar to make it as clean as C++, and I would argue that C++ syntax here looks better than Rust, despite C++ in general being ugly.
    7
  2. But assembly is easier to understand and write programs in than Rust, it just has a larger vocabulary is all.
    3
  3.  @ccgarciab  Or maybe he wrote the library functions he uses to handle things 20 years ago and doesn't need to do anything manually anymore. I would argue that Rust's syntax is garbage and I'd rather use C++, and I hate C++.
    2
  4. I would make the argument that you should never learn Rust. Instead, learn C, then halfway through learning it, learn assembly. After learning as much of both as you can for say 2 or 3 years, then learn C++. Eventually, after say a decade, design and implement your own language. That would easily take another decade for most people, more so if you're genuinely serious about the project.
    2