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

Why Rust?

rerun.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 294 posts

Re: Why Rust?

#81

Post by kajaktum »

qaq wrote: post #30
pdpi wrote: post #12

> Rust's enums and exhaustive match statement are just amazing ADTs + pattern matching are the killer feature set that makes the more popular functional languages so damn pleasant to use, and they're starting to spread to more and more languages. I suspect that, 50 years from now, we'll look back and see them as the key paradigm shift of this era.

ADTs is last missing piece that would make me fully content with Go :)

I agree, I love that Go is simple but it is simply too...simple. It makes it hard to represent a much harder state transformations.

Re: Why Rust?

#82

Post by kajaktum »

richdodd wrote: post #74

> There is of course some legitimate worry that the Rust crate ecosystem could devolve into the crazy left-pad world of npm, and it is something to be wary about, but so far the Rust crates keep an overall high quality. Note that the particular case of left-pad cannot happen with crates.io/cargo, because once published, you cannot unpublish a crate. You can 'yank' it, in which case it will not be resolved by Cargo.to…

What is the alternative to not having a crate ecosystem? Everyone roll their own smallvec implementations? How is that any better?

Re: Why Rust?

#83

Post by marcosdumay »

indy wrote: post #49
sirwhinesalot wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bubble, 99/100 crypto companies are going to crash and burn, or already have. If you manage to land on the 1/100 that actually does something useful and survives, well, better odds than the lottery I suppose.

Sounds a lot like Silicon Valley circa. 1999

Except that cryptomoney isn't adding insane amounts of value in any niche, outside of extortion and evading government controls.

Re: Why Rust?

#84

Post by timeon »

jmull wrote: post #75

Honestly, this kind of breathless adulation is off-putting to me. > If I'm honest, the main reason is because I love Rust. That's nice if it works for you, but I'm looking to build and maintain software well and efficiently. I don't want a programming language I can love I want a tool. (BTW, old and tired but true: don't love things that can't love you back.)

But I love good food.

Re: Why Rust?

#85

Post by pjmlp »

dannymi wrote: post #77
pjmlp wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> C++ promised to be a language that was both high performance and very expressive but I always found it very difficult to work at a high level of abstraction in C++. The sharp details always stab through. I wonder why, doing Windows programming with OWL in 1993 was quite delightful, or Mac with AppToolbox/PowerPlant,... Yes there is always C stuff coming throught the cracks, but I see similar aproaches with Rust cod…

>I wonder why, doing Windows programming with OWL in 1993 was quite delightful, For me, it's because memories are not trustworthy (rose-colored glasses). Also, I had less experience back then. And we as an industry didn't know any better. I got started in programming in Borland Pascal and Borland C++. Because of nostalgy, I've tried using them for fun again ten years ago and boy is there a reason I stopped using them…

Compared with Win16 Petzold style, that looks great, and it also reveals lack of knowledge from OWL features that don't require direct Win16 calls like raw strings instead of TString.

By the way, you should have a dive into how the "modern" development experience with Rust/WinRT compares with C++ Builder in 2022.

Re: Why Rust?

#86

Post by indy »

marcosdumay wrote: post #83
indy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a lot like Silicon Valley circa. 1999

Except that cryptomoney isn't adding insane amounts of value in any niche, outside of extortion and evading government controls.

Evading government controls sounds like a valuable attribute.

Re: Why Rust?

#87

Post by Thaxll »

azangru wrote: post #70

> By using Rust for both our frontend and backend, we have a unified stack of Rust everywhere, simplifying our hiring. > I can write web apps in another language than JavaScript > I can write web apps that are fast Yeah, this is what's worrying me. If you look at rerun.io website, you will notice that it's built with Next.js, i.e. is using a React framework to build pages that have no interactivity whatsoever. Next.j…

Rust will never make it to the frontend at scale. There is a reason why JS was invented. People doing frontend dev don't want to bother with slow compile time or 3 strings implementation.

And the fast argument is missleading at best, every modern language are "fast" enough, if Amazon and Google runs Java that mean it's fast enough for 99% of workload.

Re: Why Rust?

#88

Post by Keyframe »

amelius wrote: post #9

This must be how people felt about C++ in the beginning ...

I actually remember that time! C++ rode on a wave of OOP hype. It was all about that, packaged into something people were kind of familiar with. OOP WAS THE FUTURE, MAN!

Re: Why Rust?

#89

Post by amelius »

pdpi wrote: post #12

> Rust's enums and exhaustive match statement are just amazing ADTs + pattern matching are the killer feature set that makes the more popular functional languages so damn pleasant to use, and they're starting to spread to more and more languages. I suspect that, 50 years from now, we'll look back and see them as the key paradigm shift of this era.

What makes functional languages so damn pleasant to use is the fact that closures are cleaned up automatically by the runtime system once you're done with them.

Re: Why Rust?

#90

Post by flohofwoe »

Thaxll wrote: post #87
azangru wrote: post #70

> By using Rust for both our frontend and backend, we have a unified stack of Rust everywhere, simplifying our hiring. > I can write web apps in another language than JavaScript > I can write web apps that are fast Yeah, this is what's worrying me. If you look at rerun.io website, you will notice that it's built with Next.js, i.e. is using a React framework to build pages that have no interactivity whatsoever. Next.j…

Rust will never make it to the frontend at scale. There is a reason why JS was invented. People doing frontend dev don't want to bother with slow compile time or 3 strings implementation. And the fast argument is missleading at best, every modern language are "fast" enough, if Amazon and Google runs Java that mean it's fast enough for 99% of workload.

Typescript and React project build times are easily in the same ballpark as Rust or C++ for similar code base sizes though, yet they are used in the frontend 'at scale' ;)
Post reply on HN