231–240 of 379 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java has not so great reputation about safety.
That's interesting because it is based on the same principles of not letting developers do harmful thing as a way to guarantee security.
If you're fighting, you've lost. The way to convert everyone to Rust you need to be better the the competition. Not just better as in "look at my features that will make your code safer". People may see the value but think "I get on just fine without the borrow checker so it isn't too important". You need to be far better then the replacement by providing the following: * Great Tooling ( IDEs ) * Great Libraries ( Ev…
On similar note, why Rust over Go? If I look at everything I used to write in C, I'd say 80% is well suited for Go and the rest I would fallthrough to Rust for. For the stuff where having a GC and slightly less control is OK, I don't see why I would want to use Rust. Rust is just much more complex and I prefer to keep it simple stupid (KISS). Basically, Go is good for 90% of what I used to use Java for and 80% of wha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java has not so great reputation about safety.
Please expound on that. Garbage collection, no pointer arithmetic, and array bounds checking seems like good safety features.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's a good example of it?
I don't want to single out anyone or any specific projects, so this is going to be a generalization, but since you asked: In my experience, there's a lot of hostility and arrogance. More than in any other community, I've seen Go developers shut down discussion by closing comment threads on Github; reject pull requests and refuse to debate the merits of the change; castigate people for "not following proper procedure"…
I find it pretty terrible that Kubernetes develops on Slack/Github/Videochats. For being an Open Source project, it rejects open source tooling and makes it difficult for people with poor english skills to participate (text-based meetings are much better for inclusiveness). Even if you do listen in on the video meetings, they give you a feeling as an outsider that many of the decisions have already been made elsewhere (some obscure github issue conversation, a google doc comment on a 1 year old doc, etc). It seems the only way to meaningfully participate in the k8s community is to be a known insider... :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good point. I agree there are other reasons to use Go, I what mean is that unless I have a project that gets a lot of bang for the buck out of those, the KISSness of Go wins out over those nice features and their correlated complexity. GC was just at the forefront of that list of features.
There's simple, and there's anti-intellectual. Go would be the latter.
Still, the fact that all those languages are in the top 10 of programming languages kind of says that people don't really care.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In Go I can only write libraries for Go programs. That's not true. It's quite simple to create a loadable shared object in go and call it using anything with a c ffi.
Calling C from Go has significant overhead [1], doesn't that mean calling Go from C is equally slow? [1] https://www.cockroachlabs.com/blog/the-cost-and-complexity-o...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The kind of safety guarantees Rust provides are, in my opinion, insufficient justification for experienced developers to move from C or C++. Avoiding security related issues based on a whole class of problems prevented in Rust by design is a huge benefit. It's better for compiler to prevent that, than to rely on levels of experience, while anyone can make a mistake in reality.
Rust only deals with half of the story at the compile time because it can't deal with stuff like cyclical refs, etc., and even without it it also makes a lot of valid code invalid because of it's borrowing rules. That's not saying that borrow checker is worthless but it does add overhead and frankly in a lot of scenarios that's just not necessary, even with all that fancy compile time checking you still need to do te…
It's important to emphasize out that this is compile time overhead, not run-time overhead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good point. I agree there are other reasons to use Go, I what mean is that unless I have a project that gets a lot of bang for the buck out of those, the KISSness of Go wins out over those nice features and their correlated complexity. GC was just at the forefront of that list of features.
There's simple, and there's anti-intellectual. Go would be the latter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I completely agree. The biggest reason I haven't seriously tried Rust yet is because, despite all the vocal pro-Rust opinions we've all been inundated lately, I struggle to name a single interesting thing about the language apart from "safety". I wish the Rust evangelists would come to terms with the fact that to many developers memory safety is not a particularly important concern (for many different and often very…
You're only going to anger people by referring to another group as 'evangelists' when you yourself have already made note that you don't know enough about Rust to see why they are promoting it. There's much more to Rust than safety. You should actually spend a few months with it, and then give your opinion.
Safety is a cool feature, but Rust is more than just safety, and pitching it as 'rust is safe' when it's not (and, often, it's not...) and when people dont care about that, doesn't convince people.
There are a lot of people who blog about rust, and almost invariably the 'killer feature' they come up with is safety.
It's not the killer feature; it's the side effect of strong memory management without a GC on an excellent general purpose programming language.
We could certainly do with more posts about how great and practical rust is, what the state of rust tooling is, and what great rust libraries there are with no mention at all of safety.
(... because safety is a cool technical feature; but the others; tooling, libraries and productivity are active barriers to adoption)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please expound on that. Garbage collection, no pointer arithmetic, and array bounds checking seems like good safety features.
Well, I don't know about java's reputation, but there's this: http://www.cvedetails.com/product/19117/Oracle-JRE.html?vend... http://www.cvedetails.com/product/1526/SUN-JRE.html?vendor_i...