On: Microsoft is creating a new Rust-based programming...

[_bxg1]

Argh, they couldn't just contribute to the existing project.

[steveklabnik → _bxg1]

Microsoft already contributes to the Rust project; for example, Azure sponsors our CI.

[techntoke → steveklabnik]

Lol, they host our data so therefore they contribute. That is some next level Stockholm Syndrome.

[steveklabnik → techntoke]

We use a lot of CI; those resources are not cheap. And it is central to the way we develop the language, so it really really matters.

(And this is just the most obvious and clear way that they support Rust, it’s not limited to that.)

[dralley → techntoke]

They're not "hosting the data" they're donating hundreds of CPU cores and infrastructure.

[techntoke → dralley]

So does GitLab and it actually has an open source version.

[kasperni → _bxg1]

Argh, you couldn't just take the time to read the actual article.

"The ownership model in Verona is based on groups of objects, not like in Rust where it's based on a single object.

[_bxg1 → kasperni]

I did read that. So it's not a straight clone, but still, Rust has enough of an uphill battle as it is to reach wide adoption, without having its target market fragmented. So I would've been excited to see Microsoft embracing it instead of building a competitor. Not that I can necessarily judge them for that, but it's still disappointing.

[rat9988 → _bxg1]

Having rust as the only low level language with ownership concept isn't ideal either.

[nwallin → rat9988]

Not ideal isn't necessarily worse.

It is objectively worse for there to be two such languages, one of which is poorly funded and the other funded by Microsoft than have one such language that is cross platform.

Also the Java oxygen is sucked out of the room by C#. All the OCaml oxygen is sucked out of the room by F#. A world where all the rust oxygen is sucked out of the room by R# and tied to the windows ecosystem is a bad one.

They've tried this shit with a dozen other languages and besides C# being better than Java, (even though the .NET ecosystem sucks) it's always ended terribly. C++/CLR, IronPython, IronRuby, J#, etc.

Having your tech embraced by Microsoft is the kiss of death.

[pjmlp → nwallin]

Until C# runs in half of the platforms that Java does, there is hardly any oxygen to suck.

[xhroot → nwallin]

> IronPython, IronRuby

"IronRust" would be amusing

[phkahler → rat9988]

>> Having rust as the only low level language with ownership concept isn't ideal either.

I dont agree. Proliferation of languages has it's down side. Very few are self hosting, with most being built with C++. Rust is a safe C++ replacement. We dont need a bunch of those.

[_bxg1 → rat9988]

Sure, it's just that right now it's trying to bootstrap that category in the first place

[gtirloni → _bxg1]

I understand the frustration but this is from Microsoft Research. There is a long way before they validate the concept (or not).

If you're looking for a memory-safe language today or in the next couple of years, I don't think anybody will ditch Rust for Verona.

[_bxg1 → gtirloni]

Fair enough