Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
dave.cheney.net
Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
1–10 of 102 posts
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#2"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines.
Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and Node.js (v8) and have lost patience with the high deployment costs of JVM based languages."
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#3There will be some crossover since Go's AOT compilation and low latency pause times will make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#4There will be some crossover since Go's AOT compilation and low latency pause times will make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
>> make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
like "micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines"? I highly doubt it! Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now).
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#5"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
They forgot the mindshare of PHP users. The tradeoffs Go makes are rather similar (simplicity, ease of deployment vs expressivenes and consistency).
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#6"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
I am not sure if many programmers are "prepared to accept more complex syntax" (etc.) than those of C++...
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#7There will be some crossover since Go's AOT compilation and low latency pause times will make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
>> make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go. like "micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines"? I highly doubt it! Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now).
> Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now)
As long as it lacks Windows support Swift has no chance to be even considered for an AAA game engine.
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#8There will be some crossover since Go's AOT compilation and low latency pause times will make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
>> make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go. like "micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines"? I highly doubt it! Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now).
Yup, like the post about Discord processing images from yesterday underscored. If you need top tier performance you're going to have to reach for a language like Rust, C or C++ because without discrete control over your allocations and memory placement you will have something slower.
C# is about the closest thing these days thanks to value types but even then Unity had to drop down to C++ to really get the performance they needed at the engine level.
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#9"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
I am not sure if many programmers are "prepared to accept more complex syntax" (etc.) than those of C++...
Thankfully that wasn’t implied at all, and it’s not true that rust has more complex semantics (or, I think, syntax, although I could be wrong on that).
That said, it certainly is more complicated refactoring arbitrary data flows. There is certainly a cost for all the benefits! :)
Re: Why Go and Rust Are Not Competitors (2015)
#10"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
Curious, what are the "high deployment costs of JVM based languages"? Don't must standard workloads simply deploy a jar?