Several core problems with Rust
bykozy.me
Several core problems with Rust
1–10 of 341 posts
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#2[flagged]
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#3I think we’ve officially reached the inflection point where the Rust haters have become more annoying than the Rust evangelists. Maybe in a couple years we will finally be able to stop writing blog post about it.
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#4So, Ada?
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#5Totally wrong.
> Its compilation is slow. I mean SLOW. Slower than C++.
No way. Maybe Rust 1.0, but it's steadily improved and it's definitely faster than C++ now.
> It’s complex. Just as complex as C++.
True, but the problem with C++'s complexity is that you have to memorise all of it or you'll accidentally invoke UB. It's so complex that is basically impossible.
Rust is complex but most of the time the compiler will tell you if you got it wrong. There are exceptions of course (lots of async footguns) but it's still night and day.
> Memory safety is not that sacred. In fact, for many applications malfunctioning is better than crashing
Not sure I really need to counter this...
> When handling lots of mutable shared state (GUI, DB, stateful services, OS/hardware), the performance of native Rust memory model is subpar, and non-native unsafes just leave you with slow compilation, high complexity, and no memory safety in the end — which makes Rust practically meaningless for heavy mutable state jobs.
Not totally clear what he's getting at here. Maybe the ergonomics of GUI style programming which are still being figured out? Hardly a deal breaker though is it? There are plenty of C/C++ GUI libraries with terrible ergonomics and the only one that is actually great (Qt) had to use a custom language extension for decades to achieve that.
> So, is the Rust bad or good? It’s neither. It’s a mediocre programming language with thousands of man-month put into its development
I would love to hear what he thinks a good programming language is, because I can easily pick more holes in any other language than he has.
This anti-Rust zealotry is super tedious.
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#6> "there is just no perfect correctness possible in the Turing machine model"
Grrr. Clueless people keep saying that. People have been verifying programs for over forty years now. Formal correctness in terms of not violating assertions is possible for most useful programs. As someone pointed out about the Microsoft Static Driver Verifier, if you're program is anywhere near undecidability, it has no business being in the kernel. This not a legit criticism.
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#7[flagged]
Why do you think that?
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#8I think we’ve officially reached the inflection point where the Rust haters have become more annoying than the Rust evangelists. Maybe in a couple years we will finally be able to stop writing blog post about it.
Not to worry, another tech thing will be along shortly to fill the hype/hate cycle with its own drivel.
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#9The author would probably find joy in using Zig.
Personally my biggest complain from Rust is that I wish it was more readable. I've seen function signatures that seemed straight out of C++.
Re: Several core problems with Rust
#10I was waiting for the part where author advocates for what they like but no it’s just a rant