• arendjr@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    If we’re looking at it from a Rust angle anyway, I think there’s a second reason that OOP often becomes messy, but less so in Rust: Unlimited interior mutability. Rust’s borrow checker may be annoying at times, but it forces you to think about ownership and prevents you from stuffing statefulness where it shouldn’t be.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      To be fair, that’s an issue in almost every imperative language and even some functional languages. Rust, C, and C++ are the only imperative languages I know of that make a serious effort to restrict mutability.

      • IsoSpandy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I also love this. I don’t why but gc languages feel so incomplete to me. I like to know where the data is that I have. In c/c++ I know if I am passing data or pointer, in rust I know if it’s a reference or the data itself. Idk, allows me to think better

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Is there any reason an OO language couldn’t have a borrow checker? Sure, it would be wildly more complex to implement but I don’t see how it’s impossible.

      • magic_lobster_party@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        OO languages typically use garbage collector. The main purpose of the borrow checker is to resolve the ambiguity of who is responsible for deallocating the data.

        In GC languages, there’s usually no such ambiguity. The GC takes care of it.