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

Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

stu2b50.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 352 posts

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#171

Post by dpacmittal »

tabs_masterrace wrote: post #165
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rewriting is very expensive, and the advocate will need to make a VERY strong case for Rust if they're asking your company to invest in replacing it - and alternatives have to be suggested as well, including other languages and a good list of things wrong with Node / TS. Consider developer availability as well. I don't think a strong enough argument can be made. I'm sure you CAN write web services in Rust, and that i…

Swift / Vapor is amazing as well. They just released version 4, which streamlined and tidied up lots of things, can't recommend it enough. There's just something solid about Swift's strictness and compile time checks, that make it easy to be sure you're handling all possible code paths, and you can be reasonable confident it works and won't break all the time. Also very lean on dependencies, mostly unopinionated, and…

That con is a pretty big one. Macs have less than 10% desktop market share.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#172

Post by hellofunk »

estsauver wrote: post #166
hellofunk wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume you mean static typing enabled. Because lisps are already dynamically typed to begin with.

Thanks, I actually meant gradually typed systems, like rust typed or closure with heavy spec usage.

I think you mean Clojure. Closure is something different.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#173

Post by hellofunk »

pjmlp wrote: post #158
hellofunk wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just googling “f# compile times” would beg to differ.

Apparently you didn't bother to read the 3 answers that come up. Only one of them says anything and it an empty statement like > F#'s compile times also seem to err on the long side but not very much so, my impression goes. However it is quite easy to validate write the same algorithm in F# and Rust and then compare. Ah but Rust is AOT compiled, easy, use NGEN, .NET Native, or Mono AOT for the F# compile time measure…

Apparently you assume that everyone’s google results are identical.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#174

Post by estsauver »

hellofunk wrote: post #172
estsauver wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I actually meant gradually typed systems, like rust typed or closure with heavy spec usage.

I think you mean Clojure. Closure is something different.

What a terrible day for autocorrect, thank you.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#175

Post by pjmlp »

hellofunk wrote: post #173
pjmlp wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you didn't bother to read the 3 answers that come up. Only one of them says anything and it an empty statement like > F#'s compile times also seem to err on the long side but not very much so, my impression goes. However it is quite easy to validate write the same algorithm in F# and Rust and then compare. Ah but Rust is AOT compiled, easy, use NGEN, .NET Native, or Mono AOT for the F# compile time measure…

Apparently you assume that everyone’s google results are identical.

Apparently you are too lazy to actually come up with some numbers of Rust compile times being faster than F# compile times.

Offloading to Google is so much easier.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#176

Post by addicted »

johnfn wrote: post #41
byteofbits wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a datapoint for your hypothesis, when working in a typed language I will build my code only a few times a day. I much prefer working from a logical and thoughtful approach rather than iteration. At the point where I start a build I am already reasonably confident that it will do what I want it to. There are some bugs where I will need to re-build several times consecutively but these are relatively rare for me (I…

That's really interesting. Compiling only a few times a day is mind boggling to me - in a normal day I'd probably average hundreds to a thousand compilation cycles! The main thing that I use compiling for is to validate little off-by-one things. Like, is substring() exclusive on the second parameter? What about range syntax and the slice operator? What if I wrote + 1 instead of - 1 somewhere, or did < instead of <=?…

> is substring() exclusive on the second parameter

I can’t imagine not looking up the documentation to do this.

If a language had a REPL I may then confirm it in the REPL, but almost certainly would pull up the docs first.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#177

Post by im3w1l »

_-___________-_ wrote: post #60
johnfn wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's an issue for warm caches as well. I had a 10 second compilation cycle to add a comment to a file in a project with a couple hundred lines of code and like 4 lines in my cargo.toml. 10 seconds! For a few hundred lines! Maybe that doesn't sound insane, but extrapolating out, that's at least 100x worse than the languages that I'm used to. (I know that compilation speed is a Hard Problem, I know that I'm compari…

> I had a 10 second compilation cycle to add a comment to a file in a project with a couple hundred lines of code and like 4 lines in my cargo.toml. Why compile again after adding a comment?

In fast-compiling languages, it's viable to have recompile-on-file-save or even continuous recompilation. Modern (and they aren't that modern anymore) IDE's will show red squiggles under code with compilation errors without requiring any action at all.

Re: Rust Is Surprisingly Good as a Server Language

#178

Post by The_rationalist »

emerongi wrote: post #148
tomerbd wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ecosystem, i.e. Spring.

Oof, there are people out there that like to work with Spring? The over-engineering in the Java ecosystem has wasted more of my time than saved it.

The learning curve should be beaten after a few weeks and is definitely lower than learning rust. On the other hand, the productivity and expressiveness return on investment is huge. Spring is arguably the state of the art framework on the server and is integrated with so many powerful technologies.
Post reply on HN