111–120 of 195 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s no reason you couldn’t have a rust jit for development then compile the code for production (or stick with a jit for prod too).
Honestly it would probably be even faster than unoptimized aot compolation
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's why so many useful things start with a single person or *a very small team*, You subtly shifted the goal posts here. But even if you start out with a single person you eventually have to have new maintainers, if only because of human mortality. Software is a young field so we haven't had to contend much with this fact yet, but it's inevitable. Personally I think something like Rust is helpful for large solo…
My personal opinion is that Rust is a bit too lengthy to keep everything in your head. For a solo program, I'd probably go with Python first, just because it tends to produce very short and yet readable source code. And yes, I shifted the goal post a bit by assuming the team to be medium to large in size. If I assume a very small team like the initial Photoshop release with 2 people closely working together every day…
Within Rust is a smaller, simpler, safer language struggling to get out
Its syntax is inspired by Ada, and as far as I know the designer has no PhD in type theory, so it matches the requirements put forth by the other commenters too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How would you express the same semantics with a different syntax? This isn't the problem, the problem is "... and keep the syntax C++-like?".
Is it? I don't know if keeping Rust's syntax C++-like is a stated goal of the project, but okay sure we can add that caveat to my question. The big problem I see is that people will say "Lifetime annotations are ugly and noisy" and when pressed on the issue will eventually concede that they just want GC(which is not about syntax, but semantics)
Rust is certainly not the last word in systems programming languages, but it's an huge leap forward from C and C++. To be honest, it's a sad reflection of our industry that it's taken this long to get basic safety + ML circa 1975 language features into this niche. If things had turned out a little bit different we could all have been using OCaml for the past few decades.
Sadly, Rust is only a "huge leap forward from C and C++" for some use-cases. Simple things like returning a const reference to a slot in an immutable array are easily 10x the amount of source code in Rust when compared to C. And all the standard libraries for embedded systems are C, so to get into embedded development, you definitely need to be good at reading C code. Rust is an additional skill, but if you only know…
It's not, and you're over indexing on your experience with OpenGL.
There are plenty of rust libs that are thing wrappers over C libraries. They're widely used, without a problem. libgit2, written in C, is the most popular Rust library for git bindings.
Despite that, people do prefer pure Rust libraries for a very valid reason - it makes building the project, especially cross-compiling very easy. That's why cargo audit shifted from libgit2 to gitoxide.
Who is sponsoring the development of these libraries? The Rust Foundation gave the developer of gitoxide grants to develop it, with the eventual goal of replacing libgit2 in cargo.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience with OpenGL, but I don't think it's accurate to extrapolate your experience with that onto the entire ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This, I don't understand why we have to load these languages up with so much syntax, it's mind boggling to think that some how we feel it's beneficial to have so much. I'm admittedly biased to the symbolic expression but surely we could have come up with some middle ground.
Two things: - It was made to be approachable for C++ experts - The idea was that language could be effortlessly greppable.
I refuse to use rust for a multitude of reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have a C++ service running in production Is it on a network (or other) security boundary, exposed to attack from the Internet? Is it deployed on millions of machines worldwide? _Those_ are the primary targets for replacement, because the networked environment is a very hostile place, and people are fed up with the consequences of that. Regular announcements of "sorry all your private data has been leaked lol". Co…
I'd guess most services where performance matters are in the background. And this particular C++ service is only accessible over internal LAN, to be used by other back-end servers. I agree with you that if ha-proxy and nginx didn't exist yet, they would be prime candidates for being implemented in Rust. But now that they already exist and reliably work, I'm not sure there is enough pain for them to get replaced anyti…
https://blog.cloudflare.com/how-we-built-pingora-the-proxy-t...
My personal take on this subject is that Rust turns experts back into beginners and some devs react with hatred because of the fear this induces. For me it was the opposite. I was getting bored with my industry and thinking of a move to something else like management. Rust came along 6 yeas ago (for me) and threw me a lifeline. I love getting good at something that is hard, it’s just very satisfying. I do get why som…
The author seems very anxious because Rust is getting traction and they don't like Rust. They're afraid that one day Rust will become a "monoculture" and everything will be written in it. I like Rust, but I consider this very, very unlikely. Rust has actually brought more choice to the programming language scenario. If we're talking about monoculture, let's talk about C/C++. For decades this was the only viable optio…
FWIW it was LLVM that catalyzed the modern florescence of programming language innovation. Rust is just another result of that shift, not its cause.