[rust-dev] std::num::pow() is inadequate / language concepts

Gregor Cramer remarcg at gmx.net
Fri Jul 25 14:04:40 PDT 2014

> I disagree with that: " I never accept compromises, this is
> the way how to develop magnificient software"
> Because it's not. Unless you use magnificient only in academic context.

????? I'm not doing academic things.

> It's not so much about wether or not overloading could be used in rust
> without causing really painful issues. The question is if overlaoding
> fits into the language's design principles.

I agree, if overloading does not fit at all, then it should not be done.

> Overloading is not necessary. It's just one of many ways that lead to Rome.

Yes, many ways are leading to Rome. One of the ways is easy to go,
and is a joy. Another way is tedious or cumbersome.

> A language is about more than just "what you consider beautiful,
> etc."... It's about wether it allows agile, fast paced development
> across diverse teams and average programmers can produce code anyone
> else can read without getting eye cancer.

Fast-paced development without generic programming? And overloading
is supporting generic programming.

> > I cannot see that overloading is horrible or complicated. It's another
> No, but it might be unnecessary.

Possibly I'm wrong that overloading is neccessary in Rust, that's why
I'm talking, I'm not a master in Rust programming. But fact is: as I
stumbled over std::num::pow() I could see problems if not
having overloading. And I repeat: std::num::pow() is only an
example for a general problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/attachments/20140725/4208d5e1/attachment.html>

More information about the Rust-dev mailing list