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

Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

smallcultfollowing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 206 posts

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#21

Post by CountSessine »

andrewstuart wrote: post #12

My theory is that every technology that is too complex gets replaced with something that does the same thing more simply. You see this relentlessly in the JavaScript ecosystem where waves of too-complex tools get rapidly replaced with something else, only to be swept away again when someone finds an even more simple way to do the same thing. This must be the fate of Rust - eventually it will be replaced with a langua…

I think any language that has the concept of storage classes will be complicated because you have to deal with copy versus move vs borrow semantics. Other languages get around this by just saying that primitives are on the frame and everything else is on the heap.

Efficiency has its price.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#22

Post by mdtusz »

ilovecaching wrote: post #9
paulgb wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it, where's the bloat here? By using consistent rules across the language, Rust is requiring developers to keep less in their head. The author acknowledges this: > Newer users find Rust easier to use and more consistent; they don’t have to learn the “edges” of where one thing works and where it doesn’t. E.g. currently, Rust users have to know that if they want to use async on a trait, they need to add a d…

I have primarily worked on kernels written in C during my career, but I read through the official Rust book and wrote a small microkernel using Rust and my opinion is that Rust is already everything I hate about C++. It's already a huge language with a large upfront learning curve and there's no hope of mastering it as it's already grown so large that it could never fit in one person's head. Instead of focusing on so…

I'm curious why you think it's too big to master. There's certainly a lot to the language, but it's design means that these various facets are largely contained to their area of effect. I'd be confident in the assertion that most rust developers don't need to understand much more than the basics of the type system, traits, lifetimes, and the surface levels of async.

The biggest benefit to the language is precisely that all the Lego pieces fit together and you simply don't need to worry about (in Lego parlance) "illegal moves". Whenever I write C or C++, I'm constantly worrying about whether or not I'm doing something incorrectly and potentially writing dangerous code. In rust, this mostly disappears and you can focus on the actual problem domain you're working in rather than computer science problems.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#23

Post by brown »

echelon wrote: post #13
andrewstuart wrote: post #12

My theory is that every technology that is too complex gets replaced with something that does the same thing more simply. You see this relentlessly in the JavaScript ecosystem where waves of too-complex tools get rapidly replaced with something else, only to be swept away again when someone finds an even more simple way to do the same thing. This must be the fate of Rust - eventually it will be replaced with a langua…

Writing Rust/Actix for server code is a breeze. There's zero complexity. It's practically Java, just with a more Ruby-like syntax. Entirely depends on what you're building. Edit: You can have a small Actix app up over the weekend and never touch "lifetimes" until you're ready.

I could not disagree more.

The moment you need to do something remarkably simple, such as string concatenation, you are confronted with the reality that Rust is a much lower level language.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#24

Post by HKH2 »

buzzdenver wrote: post #16
Scarbutt wrote: post #3

Rust is so simple and elegant.

Was it simple and elegant from the beginning, or did it click at some point? I started learning it from the O'Reily book yesterday, and so far it's easily the steepest learning curve for a language.

It's steeper than Haskell?

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#25

Post by andrewstuart »

CountSessine wrote: post #21
andrewstuart wrote: post #12

My theory is that every technology that is too complex gets replaced with something that does the same thing more simply. You see this relentlessly in the JavaScript ecosystem where waves of too-complex tools get rapidly replaced with something else, only to be swept away again when someone finds an even more simple way to do the same thing. This must be the fate of Rust - eventually it will be replaced with a langua…

I think any language that has the concept of storage classes will be complicated because you have to deal with copy versus move vs borrow semantics. Other languages get around this by just saying that primitives are on the frame and everything else is on the heap. Efficiency has its price.

As I understand it Rust is composed of 5 or 6 sub languages.

I find it hard to believe that there's no way to get the benefits of Rust without 5 languages.

Why can't a programming language be one language that does everything it needs to do? Seems crazy to me to have 5 or 6 sublanguages.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#26

Post by echelon »

buzzdenver wrote: post #16
Scarbutt wrote: post #3

Rust is so simple and elegant.

Was it simple and elegant from the beginning, or did it click at some point? I started learning it from the O'Reily book yesterday, and so far it's easily the steepest learning curve for a language.

In my honest opinion, lifetimes should be hand waved until you've played with the rest of the language. By then it'll follow as naturally as your first lesson on OOP.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#27

Post by buzzdenver »

HKH2 wrote: post #24
buzzdenver wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it simple and elegant from the beginning, or did it click at some point? I started learning it from the O'Reily book yesterday, and so far it's easily the steepest learning curve for a language.

It's steeper than Haskell?

I can only compare to C, perl, ruby, python or bash.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#28

Post by echelon »

llanowarelves wrote: post #6
ilovecaching wrote: post #4

This is why Rust will eventually become the next C++ - it's becoming just as bloated with type theory, a cumbersome syntax, and will eventually ignite a begrudging dislike by the people that have to find a subset of the language to make sense of just to write simple programs. Everything about this language is overcomplicated by language enthusiasts. The best thing for Rust over the next few years is for it to fall to…

That's why I don't think it's worth dropping modern C++ for it. Only major thing C++ was missing that I wanted is modules. Yeah you have to have high enough agency to use a subset of the language, but so what? I dont plan on having 300 interchangeable human NPCs smashing keys on it, like Go was designed for.

I can imagine a very similar argument being made for punch cards.

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#29

Post by __s »

ilovecaching wrote: post #9
paulgb wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it, where's the bloat here? By using consistent rules across the language, Rust is requiring developers to keep less in their head. The author acknowledges this: > Newer users find Rust easier to use and more consistent; they don’t have to learn the “edges” of where one thing works and where it doesn’t. E.g. currently, Rust users have to know that if they want to use async on a trait, they need to add a d…

I have primarily worked on kernels written in C during my career, but I read through the official Rust book and wrote a small microkernel using Rust and my opinion is that Rust is already everything I hate about C++. It's already a huge language with a large upfront learning curve and there's no hope of mastering it as it's already grown so large that it could never fit in one person's head. Instead of focusing on so…

Hi, I work in C professionally

A couple years ago I rewrote thousands of lines of Javascript into Rust (game engine & corresponding game server): https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/k3jy5g/i_rewrote_10k_...

Overall I don't think Rust is a silver bullet, but it works effectively as a high level manual memory management language. Whereas when I had to work on C++ code I was running into messes where lifetime issues were undefined behavior instead of compiler errors

Re: Rust 2024 the Year of Everywhere?

#30

Post by aussiesnack »

andrewstuart wrote: post #25
CountSessine wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think any language that has the concept of storage classes will be complicated because you have to deal with copy versus move vs borrow semantics. Other languages get around this by just saying that primitives are on the frame and everything else is on the heap. Efficiency has its price.

As I understand it Rust is composed of 5 or 6 sub languages. I find it hard to believe that there's no way to get the benefits of Rust without 5 languages. Why can't a programming language be one language that does everything it needs to do? Seems crazy to me to have 5 or 6 sublanguages.

Not quite sure what you mean by sublanguages - procedural and declarative macros perhaps?

In any case I wonder about the simplicity/complexity dance. Simplification ends up with something like Lisp, in which you write DSLs that each has to be independently learned. Elixir does something similar. Some differentiation might just be a natural consequence of chasing ergonomics.

Post reply on HN