Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

gitdot.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 322 posts

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#181

Post by nananana9 »

altmanaltman wrote: post #143
analog_daddy wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is an advantage. I am not a rust evangelist, I am not a rust programmer or programmer at all; however while evaluating tools to use, anything written in Rust and Go at-least gets me to look at the project in more detail, since they most likely are able to ship statically linked binaries, which has been one of the key criteria for my personal evaluation of tools to select and use. So, you might not consider it…

How is statically linked binaries an unique advantage of rust or go? you can do the same with C, C++, pascal, ada, zig, and more. Rust even doesnt do the static binary file by default. You might have better devops experience as an end-user of the said software if its statically linked and its a good trend in software sure but it is not unique to go or rust. Admitting you don't know how to code and still trying to arg…

There's a pretty strong culture of "no static linking because I need to replace the .so to preserve my freedom hurr durr" in a lot of Linux spaces, so quite a few of these C/C++ FOSS libraries are a pain in the ass to statically link.

Literally last week I was porting something to Linux and had to rewrite the libwayland build scripts because they only expose a shared object.

There's also an expectation that you're going to install them via your system's package manager, not build them, so a lot of them use insane build systems (autotools, meson).

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#183

Post by olzhasar »

ottavio wrote: post #167
smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

Yeah, rust programmers are the new software vegans. They claim it is better just because of the language, ignoring the features gap, the size of the team developing and supporting the software and not having solved any issue with the software they compete against. And to be clear, this in not in favour of GH, it is against the mentality that the programming language makes better products and programmers.

I was very excited about Rust prior to the LLM-era. I never managed to dive deep into it due to the lack of time, but was really planning to.

Nowadays when everyone and their dog are either vibe-coding with Rust or constantly shouting about it's superiority, I've lost any interest in the language. I'm learning Zig.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#184

Post by ottavio »

Patryk27 wrote: post #172
ottavio wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, rust programmers are the new software vegans. They claim it is better just because of the language, ignoring the features gap, the size of the team developing and supporting the software and not having solved any issue with the software they compete against. And to be clear, this in not in favour of GH, it is against the mentality that the programming language makes better products and programmers.

> They claim it is better just because of the language I mean, it clearly is better (in certain contexts), see e.g. https://blog.google/security/rust-in-android-move-fast-fix-t... > We adopted Rust for its security and are seeing a 1000x reduction in memory safety vulnerability density compared to Android’s C and C++ code. But the biggest surprise was Rust's impact on software delivery. With Rust changes having a 4x…

Bugs are not only related to memory and a program cannot be considered safe Just because it got rid of pointers, malloc and free.

If you really think that switching language is the main driver to get safe programs, the you are on the list of people replaceable by LLMs.

Othewise you have to understand that architettural chioces, concurrency, (weak) cryptographic function and user stupidity have a significant impact, no matter what language you use. Memory management is just a part of the problem.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#186

Post by dudisubekti »

olzhasar wrote: post #183
ottavio wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, rust programmers are the new software vegans. They claim it is better just because of the language, ignoring the features gap, the size of the team developing and supporting the software and not having solved any issue with the software they compete against. And to be clear, this in not in favour of GH, it is against the mentality that the programming language makes better products and programmers.

I was very excited about Rust prior to the LLM-era. I never managed to dive deep into it due to the lack of time, but was really planning to. Nowadays when everyone and their dog are either vibe-coding with Rust or constantly shouting about it's superiority, I've lost any interest in the language. I'm learning Zig.

What? This doesn't make sense, how is it Rust's fault if people are being lazy and tribal?

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#187

Post by thayne »

smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

I suspect the fact that Github and Gitlab use ruby backends is a significant (although by no means the only) factor in the slowness of Github and Gitlab. So yes, being written in a language that is better suited for high performance at scale is, potentially, an advantage. Although if it is vibe coded, there's a decent chance there are architectural problems that offset the advantage gained from the choice in language.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#188

Post by epolanski »

smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

You can only do so if it is "written in Zig"

/s, I love zig, but I'm consistently surprised of how popular any post containing zig in the title makes it to the front page almost daily, doesn't happen with any other language.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#189

Post by johnisgood »

saidnooneever wrote: post #178
smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

It would be nice if they mentioned anyhting at all they are doing to implement security features. instead of leaning onf Rust which does absolutely nothing in that regard. just look owasp top 10 and observe it has nothing to do with memory safety. and thats just a top 10 of things. only for very few companies, memory safety issues are a thing. most of those dont use rust because it lacks tooling and certification pat…

Yeah, this is what the people who have parroted "Rust is safe" have achieved. Rust is not "safe" in the broader sense of the word, only "memory safe". You have to implement the security yourself!

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#190

Post by epolanski »

thayne wrote: post #187
smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

I suspect the fact that Github and Gitlab use ruby backends is a significant (although by no means the only) factor in the slowness of Github and Gitlab. So yes, being written in a language that is better suited for high performance at scale is, potentially, an advantage. Although if it is vibe coded, there's a decent chance there are architectural problems that offset the advantage gained from the choice in language…

GitHub used to be great when the frontend too was in ruby, the react rework might've got somebody promoted but performance was never the same.

GitHub is so data heavy and there's so little reactivity that it should really be server side rendered.

Post reply on HN