What this optimizes for is not actually having to deal with the pain in the ass that proper Rust is, but still allowing you to be in the cool kids club writing "blazingly fast software", all while writing what's pretty much Java or C#, but with a terrible non-functional garbage collector instead of a state of the art one.
High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
21–30 of 122 posts
Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#22Everything is ARC. Clones are cheap. But you still have a reasonable sound type system and no garbage collection.
I get it. Tooling on swift is meh the further you are from Apple, so I’m not suggesting it’s better.
But from a language point of view; is it not essentially a high level rust?
Ps. I don’t really know swift. Just asking where/why I’m wrong really.
Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#23Most of the Rust code I've read is arc-mutex-slop. What this optimizes for is not actually having to deal with the pain in the ass that proper Rust is, but still allowing you to be in the cool kids club writing "blazingly fast software", all while writing what's pretty much Java or C#, but with a terrible non-functional garbage collector instead of a state of the art one.
Skill issue
Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#24Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#25Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#26I agree that the rust community frowns a little too much on the use of Arc/Cloning/Box. If you use swift, everything is ref counted, why subject yourself to so much pain for marginal gain. Tutorials and books should be more open about that, instead of pushing complex lifetime hacks etc., also show the safe and easy ways. The article gives Java a worse devx rank than Go and I can't agree. Java is at least on par with…
Pretty sure by devx they mean something like syntax ergonomics. Because otherwise rust's devx first class (cargo, clippy, crates.io) so kind of a nonstandard definition. I think it's fair to say Java's "syntax ergonomics" are a little below the rest / somewhat manual like rust or C++ by default.
Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#27Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#28Isn’t this “high level rust” idea similar to swift? Everything is ARC. Clones are cheap. But you still have a reasonable sound type system and no garbage collection. I get it. Tooling on swift is meh the further you are from Apple, so I’m not suggesting it’s better. But from a language point of view; is it not essentially a high level rust? Ps. I don’t really know swift. Just asking where/why I’m wrong really.
Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#29Java is a fine language and has sufficiently expressive types. It's the most consistently overlooked language and frankly it's completely annoying. Java is a powerhouse. If you can live with a VM, it's an amazing language. The disdain for Java is honestly just weird. The boiler plate is only marginally annoying to write and makes it considerably easier to read. The 'enterprise ecosystem' is definitely bloat, but that…
Re: High-Level Rust: Getting 80% of the Benefits with 20% of the Pain
#30Is this another AI article? What is said about Rust here has been said over and over again, and this brings nothing new to the table. They also always seem to be writing from a place of ignorance. If you're writing "high level Rust" the use of clone or Arc or whatever is negligible. If you're writing an HTTP service, your clone will be so fast it will make literally zero difference in the scope of your IO bound servi…
It is too easy to trap yourself in by sprinkling in Sized and derive(Hash) ontop of your neat little type hierarchy and then realize, that this tight abstraction is tainted and you cant use dyn anymore. As a follow up trigger: This was when i learned derive macros :)