Live data from Hacker News

Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

opensource.googleblog.com

11–20 of 233 posts

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#11

After four months , only 50% of the developers though they were as productive in Rust as other language. Given that the respondents are arguably a very capable group of engineers, this doesn't seem that great for any company looking to adopt Rust.

50% seems pretty good to me

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#12

"The top three challenging areas of Rust for current Google developers were: * Macros * Ownership and borrowing * Async programming " Async programming is the area I would like to see the most improvement, especially in the standard library. So much concurrent and parallel Rust code relies on third-party libraries because the standard library offers primitives that work but lack the "creature comforts" that developer…

Is there any Rust outfit out there that doesn't discourage macro use? For that matter, is there any team with a language out there that encourages macro use when working as a team?

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#13
post #5

"The top three challenging areas of Rust for current Google developers were: * Macros * Ownership and borrowing * Async programming " Async programming is the area I would like to see the most improvement, especially in the standard library. So much concurrent and parallel Rust code relies on third-party libraries because the standard library offers primitives that work but lack the "creature comforts" that developer…

rust team needs to abandon their own execution runtime and just bless tokio and pull it into std. They're doing nobody any favors right now

The Rust team doesn't have its own execution runtime. Tokio is certainly the closest thing to the "default".

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#14
> Rumor 5: Rust code is high quality – Confirmed!

> The respondents said that the quality of the Rust code is high — 77% of developers were satisfied with the quality of Rust code.

Well, that’s exactly what I’d expect Rust developers to say. Nobody loves Rust more than Rust adopters. Would be interesting to see more objective measures of code quality (e.g. defect rate)

Also, the type of person to work on a Rust codebase might also be more likely to write high quality code in any language, as compared to the average developer (or even average Googler).

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#15

After four months , only 50% of the developers though they were as productive in Rust as other language. Given that the respondents are arguably a very capable group of engineers, this doesn't seem that great for any company looking to adopt Rust.

At a past job we generally saw about 6 months until devs hit their stride and worked that into our hiring plans. We usually had them committing small, targeted changes within a week or two. They could usually take on tasks relatively independently in one of our simpler code bases after about 2 months. So this checks out.

Weird enough we saw more junior devs pick it up faster. They had less preconceived notions and practices to unlearn and more willing to trust rustc. It's just that when they hit their stride they are still less productive than the senior devs.

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#16
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is never going to happen, for both good reasons and bad reasons.

Yeah I figured. Fragmentation by design.

One person's "fragmentation" is another's "supporting multiple use cases is important, even if their requirements are divergent."

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#17

After four months , only 50% of the developers though they were as productive in Rust as other language. Given that the respondents are arguably a very capable group of engineers, this doesn't seem that great for any company looking to adopt Rust.

The article states, in the following sentence: “Anecdotally, these ramp-up numbers are in line with the time we’ve seen for developers to adopt other languages, both inside and outside of Google”

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#18

After four months , only 50% of the developers though they were as productive in Rust as other language. Given that the respondents are arguably a very capable group of engineers, this doesn't seem that great for any company looking to adopt Rust.

"Anecdotally, these ramp-up numbers are in line with the time we’ve seen for developers to adopt other languages, both inside and outside of Google."

"Overall, we’ve seen no data to indicate that there is any productivity penalty for Rust relative to any other language these developers previously used at Google."

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#19

After four months , only 50% of the developers though they were as productive in Rust as other language. Given that the respondents are arguably a very capable group of engineers, this doesn't seem that great for any company looking to adopt Rust.

Consider an alternative reading:

50% of developers think they are as productive in a language they have four months of practice with as they are in a language they have fourteen years of practice with.

50% of developers think they are as productive in a high-performance bit-bashing-capable language as they are in a high-level glue language.

The people in this statistic are switching from languages they have years or sometimes decades of productivity in, and they're switching from languages like python and go and java. I see a lot of programmers who do similar switches never reaching productivity parity with C or C++. 50% of devs getting there in 4 months is amazing.

Re: Rust fact vs. fiction: 5 Insights from Google's Rust journey in 2022

#20

"The top three challenging areas of Rust for current Google developers were: * Macros * Ownership and borrowing * Async programming " Async programming is the area I would like to see the most improvement, especially in the standard library. So much concurrent and parallel Rust code relies on third-party libraries because the standard library offers primitives that work but lack the "creature comforts" that developer…

Color functions are just not the right road to go down. Something akin to Javas new green threads would be better, or Go style coroutines.

The path Rust is going means async becomes viral, and is something I dislike a lot about JavaScript[0] and other languages I’ve worked in[1].

I’d love to see Rust avoid this trap.

[0]: I work in TypeScript in actuality not sure which to use here. It’s certainly by far the language I’ve used the most in my career now.

[1]: I remember it infected Python too and it was a pain as well when I did Python development years ago.

Post reply on HN