• ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 days ago

      not the IDE, its the compiler. this is also not some AI shit, in many cases (not all) the compiler can actually figure out how to do this, because it’s not hard, it would just be a lot of boilerplate if written manually.

      • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        Why did you even bring up AI? IDEs have been able to generate equality functions for decades without AI.

        It’s kinda neat to have this defined directly in the language so that compilers can implement it, but creating equality function is so low effort that this doesn’t really seem like a big deal.

        Like, you define the members in a class, then you tell your IDE to generate getters, constructor, equals, hashcode, etc all in like 5 seconds.
        I like it, it’s nice when the language itself defines reasonable defaults for things, but realistically you’re saving yourself a few seconds of effort.

        • words_number@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          Isn’t it obvious? More code to skim, scroll over and maintain if something changes. If you add a struct field, your manual EQ implementation still compiles and seems to work but is wrong and will lead to bugs. Yes, solving this for 99,999% of cases with an attribute is just far superior and does make a difference (while keeping it easy to manually implement it if needed). Hash and Ord and some other traits can be implemented in a similar fashion btw…

          • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 days ago

            I said it was better, just not much better.

            The maintenance costs of equals is nearly zero. Scrolling over boilerplate seems like a real stretch, like saying a novel with a picture every chapter is harder to read.

            I like that you can’t accidentally forget to update it, which is kinda nice but is rarely a concern.
            And it’s a bit more readable, which is nice.
            It’s better, but folks are talking like it’s Super Jesus and I think it’s more like finding a dollar in the parking lot.

            • words_number@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              Who said it was superjesus? It’s one of the smaller points on the long list of rusts advantages over other systems level PLs, but nonetheless notable. Especially if you consider that the feature that makes this possible is used for a ton of other useful stuff. And seriously, the boilerplate does matter, especially if you also add Ord, Hash and Debug impls. Your comparison with pictures in a noval makes no sense, since these add something valuable to the text and are easily distinguished from it. Heaps of boilerplate at a glance look just as meaningful as important sections of code, so being able to avoid it makes navigation significantly easier.

              • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 days ago

                I know the image post was hyperbole, but the way y’all are gushing over it is borderline religious, in an unsettling way.

                Immediately, you call boilerplate a Big Deal and identify yourself as a zealot. Even in Java, a notoriously verbose and boilerplate laden language, it’s a Small Deal unless you’re doing something insane. Let me guess, your coding in VI or something.

                Rust looks great. It’s a bunch of small improvements over most languages. But True Believers of any lang need to chill the fuck out.