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

Rust in 2018: easier to use

jvns.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 305 posts

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#61

Post by fauigerzigerk »

banachtarski wrote: post #29
eecc wrote: post #24

Julia writes she wouldn’t yet use Rust to write webservices. Right there, this could be the mission for 2018. http://www.arewewebyet.org Nobody with a sane mind would write C or CPP micro-services, but post-Spectre and Meltdown any reclaim in performance is tangibility valuable. Rust could be the one to swoop in and claim the position

> Nobody with a sane mind would write C or CPP micro-services why? I do this all the time. Maybe I should check into a nearby asylum.

>Maybe I should check into a nearby asylum.

If you do, make sure it says "believes in micro-services" on the referral ;-)

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#62

Post by erk__ »

z0ltan wrote: post #31
StreamBright wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends what is your goal. Learning a language with decent type system? Learning a language with lower level access to operating system features? I would suggest to learn OCaml because it got really popular in 2017 thanks to Facebook & Bloomberg, it has an amazing type system and you can use it to build CLI tools and web pages (Reason/Bucklescript) with an insanely good tooling (utop, jbuilder, merlin) and the commun…

I have always been interested in OCaml, but I have a genuine question though - last when I looked at seriously at it, the standard library seemed to be a bit of a mess lacking a lot of features. A lot of modern resources seemed to focus on using Jane Street's Core(?) which I would not like to use - I'd rather depend on the standard language for standard features. Is this still a thing, or am I mistaken, or both? Plea…

You could also take a look at F# wich is also a ML derived language so the syntax is very similar to OCaml.

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#63

Post by banachtarski »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #61
banachtarski wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody with a sane mind would write C or CPP micro-services why? I do this all the time. Maybe I should check into a nearby asylum.

>Maybe I should check into a nearby asylum. If you do, make sure it says "believes in micro-services" on the referral ;-)

I just mentally edit "micro-services" to "services" any time I read it hehe.

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#64

Post by Shoothe »

Manishearth wrote: post #37
grnadav1 wrote: post #18

A guy w/ 10 weeks Rust experiance and already gave a talk at RustConf?!

The closing keynote at RustConf is generally someone who is new to Rust or has never used Rust but can bring in an interesting perspective. Last year we had Joe Duffy, who I don't think has done much Rust aside from perhaps basic experimentation, but has a lot of relevant experience from running the Midori (Microsoft's safe systems language) project. (also, the author isn't a "guy")

It's interesting because when I read about how Rust can rewrite iterators code into more performant direct loops I thought about Joe's blog posts that mentioned the same efforts for .NET. Also Span. It seems .NET will have similar abstractions like Rust (of course not all can be migrated).

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#66

Post by grayrest »

papaf wrote: post #23
StreamBright wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends what is your goal. Learning a language with decent type system? Learning a language with lower level access to operating system features? I would suggest to learn OCaml because it got really popular in 2017 thanks to Facebook & Bloomberg, it has an amazing type system and you can use it to build CLI tools and web pages (Reason/Bucklescript) with an insanely good tooling (utop, jbuilder, merlin) and the commun…

I used OCaml a few years ago and I thought it was an excellent language. Despite being powerful it was really easy to learn. One thing that put me off in the end was that it didn't support native OS threads (I have the same problem with Racket). Has threading support improved over the years?

> Has threading support improved over the years?

The main push in this area is Multicore OCaml[1]. I don't track OCaml closely enough to know how getting this into the main compiler is going.

[1] https://github.com/ocamllabs/ocaml-multicore/wiki

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#67

Post by stevedonovan »

hateduser2 wrote: post #30
exikyut wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But here's a question: `rustc` often gives _actionable_ advice - how far can can you get just following that advice? You can make `rustc` happy by following suggestions, but may end up puzzled as to the reasons for the changes it suggests. Not-crazy suggestion: add a `--why` option to rustc that doesn't just shout (helpful) error messages at you but actually explains the architectural theory of why the error is occ…

I like the idea but Rust has so many issues in front of it I’m not sure it has the energy to invest in something like hay.

Yes, the compiler is a permanent construction zone and there can only be so many projects on site, let alone workers. So this feels like something that _should_ be doable outside the compiler, but using its metadata. (BTW, "rustc --explain does at least give you some nice text)

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#68

Post by dmitriid »

Yuioup wrote: post #43
eecc wrote: post #24

Julia writes she wouldn’t yet use Rust to write webservices. Right there, this could be the mission for 2018. http://www.arewewebyet.org Nobody with a sane mind would write C or CPP micro-services, but post-Spectre and Meltdown any reclaim in performance is tangibility valuable. Rust could be the one to swoop in and claim the position

Just out of curiosity, how many web framework platform are originally written and compiled in C? CPython, udev, node, v8, ... rust?

The platform may be written in C. The OS you're running microservices on is written in C/C++.

It doesn't mean that your services are written in C/C++.

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#69

Post by erpellan »

fyfy18 wrote: post #58
hateduser2 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can probably just ignore that right?

I feel the same as OP in regards to spelling mistakes. It just erks me so much that I find it really hard to continue reading. If someone hasn’t bothered to take the time to proof-read their work, what does it say about the topic they are writing about? I don’t mind if the mistakes are because they are learning English, but I’m talking about really obvious spelling mistakes.

Irks.

(I checked - TIL an 'erk' is a male member of the RAF of the lowest rank.)

Or did I just miss the ironic joke?

Re: Rust in 2018: easier to use

#70

Post by Tuna-Fish »

Yuioup wrote: post #43
eecc wrote: post #24

Julia writes she wouldn’t yet use Rust to write webservices. Right there, this could be the mission for 2018. http://www.arewewebyet.org Nobody with a sane mind would write C or CPP micro-services, but post-Spectre and Meltdown any reclaim in performance is tangibility valuable. Rust could be the one to swoop in and claim the position

Just out of curiosity, how many web framework platform are originally written and compiled in C? CPython, udev, node, v8, ... rust?

IIRC, the rust compiler started out as an OCaml project, but is now self-hosting.
Post reply on HN