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

121–130 of 294 posts

Re: Why Rust?

#121

Post by EamonnMR »

traceroute66 wrote: post #96
Thaxll wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> There is a reason why JS was invented. I disagree. As I see it, JS was invented as a browser utility, as the name implies "script", i.e same as shell script languages such as BASH, for doing small amounts of interactive stuff. What JS has morphed into is a Jeckyll & Hyde monstrosity. Frontend devs now routinely dump 200kb+ of junk down the pipe at people's browsers because its somehow "better" to dump the processin…

Of course it's better to do processing client side. You pay for server side compute, you don't pay for client side compute.

Re: Why Rust?

#122

Post by thesuperbigfrog »

ttfkam wrote: post #95
Thaxll wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Obviously not fast enough for Google since they literally invented a new programming language (Go) to address the compile time and runtime limitations of Java.

>> Obviously not fast enough for Google since they literally invented a new programming language (Go) to address the compile time and runtime limitations of Java.

Go was created to overcome complexity issues and compile times of C++ (not Java):

https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponenti...

https://go.dev/talks/2015/gophercon-goevolution.slide#4

Re: Why Rust?

#123

Post by badsectoracula »

pjmlp wrote: post #33
cageface wrote: post #29

I've started working in Rust too and I too find it a tremendous breath of fresh air. It's the first time I've been excited about a new programming language in many years. 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. Rust code, on the other hand, often doesn't l…

> 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…

> doing Windows programming with OWL in 1993 was quite delightful

I never used the C++ version OWL (though i do have Borland C++ 5 around here, perhaps i'll try it for fun at some point), but the Turbo Pascal version of OWL (which i also really used but had a brush with - and some docs) wasn't really that great - more of a helper library for the underlying Windows API, needing to know the underlying API, in practice not very different than MFC (also more of a helper library to make using Win16/Win32 easier than something to let you ignore it).

VCL was by long long far the best API/Framework (and in some ways it still is, though FCL/LCL is better since it is richer and also crossplatform).

FWIW i did a partial recreation of Turbo Pascal OWL in Free Pascal some years ago[0]. It doesn't have much of a practical use though (unless you want to make some small GUI EXE files in Free Pascal) since i think even Borland abandoned the Pascal version of OWL and i doubt many people used it.

[0] http://runtimeterror.com/tech/fowl/

Re: Why Rust?

#124

Post by maeln »

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.

> People doing frontend dev don't want to bother with slow compile time

Honestly, with my previous experience as a frontend web, compile time for frontend is starting to become as bad as a standard compiled language. When you start to have a whole framework, many (many!) dependencies (you know, the kind that make just deleting the node_modules directory slow) and webpack with some plugins for CSS, es-lint and all that, the tooling just can't keep up. It doesn't help that much of the tooling is also done in JS which is fast but not that fast.

Re: Why Rust?

#125

Post by ncmncm »

black_puppydog wrote: post #54
cageface wrote: post #29

I've started working in Rust too and I too find it a tremendous breath of fresh air. It's the first time I've been excited about a new programming language in many years. 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. Rust code, on the other hand, often doesn't l…

> Too bad most of the Rust jobs right now seem to be in crypto. It is not really surprising that the crypto bros jumped onto the bandwagon, the tech got hyped just around the same time. Just, one of them correctly. :) It's just a shame that other companies don't seem to follow suit. Except some, who always ask for "Senior Rust Developer" which I'd guess is still a limited supply market. :D

No post body was provided.

Re: Why Rust?

#126

Post by emilern »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #116
cageface wrote: post #29

I've started working in Rust too and I too find it a tremendous breath of fresh air. It's the first time I've been excited about a new programming language in many years. 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. Rust code, on the other hand, often doesn't l…

> Rust code, on the other hand, often doesn't look much more elaborate than code I write in much higher level languages I'm curious to see an example. Could you show something written in Rust, or another "much higher level language" that you think would be messier or more difficult to write in C++ ?

The enum example in the article

Re: Why Rust?

#127

Post by littlestymaar »

maeln wrote: post #124
Thaxll wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> People doing frontend dev don't want to bother with slow compile time Honestly, with my previous experience as a frontend web, compile time for frontend is starting to become as bad as a standard compiled language. When you start to have a whole framework, many (many!) dependencies (you know, the kind that make just deleting the node_modules directory slow) and webpack with some plugins for CSS, es-lint and all tha…

Yeah, this is really an instance of “tell me that you're not doing front end while not telling me you're not doing front end”. Build time are a really annoying part of modern web jobs…

Re: Why Rust?

#128

Post by Existenceblinks »

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…

What's worrying me is wasm binary size from Rust. People talk about writing web apps in other languages, which is what I wish for, but elephant in the room has few to non existence of discussion.

Re: Why Rust?

#129

Post by [deleted] »

zaphar wrote: post #73
masklinn wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Erlang has the superpowered version of this - binary pattern matching, that lets you pattern match on a bitstream directly. Erlang has a super-powered version of the pattern matching bit, but not of what GP actually likes about it: > you have to handle every case whenever you're matching on it because Erlang is dynamically typed. So partial patterns are acceptable, and not entirely uncommon.

You can use partial patterns in Rust too. I think perhaps you meant partial matches?

[deleted]

Re: Why Rust?

#130

Post by chanks »

emilern wrote: post #93
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…

Hi, author here! We are building the frontend of our _application_ in Rust and rendering it to a canvas using egui.rs. For the web site we are using more "traditional" tech, as you've noticed. I am not a big fan of the complexity of modern web sites (including our own), which is exactly why I created egui. However, it is targeted at web apps, not web sites.

I'm very curious how well this is working for you in practice, since I've been thinking about what it would look like to share a single Rust UI implementation across a webapp and native apps.
Post reply on HN