Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rust needs a web framework

ntietz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 395 posts

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#161

Post by a57721 »

kelnos wrote: post #90
andrewxdiamond wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also like to make things in Rust Seems like a good enough reason to use it to me, but perhaps I’m just another cult member. > we use Rust in production because we thought it would be easier (well safer) to teach to interpreted language OOP developers than c/c++ I think rust is just safer period, regardless of your level of expertise or background. Or are you saying that every memory safety bug was written in by s…

> I think rust is just safer period, regardless of your level of expertise or background. Or are you saying that every memory safety bug was written in by someone inexperienced? I think you're reading too much into that and creating conflict where there isn't any. GP just meant that they had a bunch of interpreted language OOP developers (probably Java or C# or something like that), and they wanted them to start writ…

> GP just meant that they had a bunch of interpreted language OOP developers (probably Java or C# or something like that), and they wanted them to start writing code in an AOT-compiled language (yes, I know about Graal native image; not the point).

JIT vs. AOT is not the same as being an interpreted language. For most applications, running on top of the virtual machine is a good thing, I don't see JVM developers turning to different languages just to escape the JVM, outside of some niche projects.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#162

Post by demi56 »

angra_mainyu wrote: post #80
gcau wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust has benefits besides just memory safety and being efficient, it has great language design and a great toolchain. I chose (learning) rust over golang for quite simple projects with no performance requirements, out of sheer frustration with the toolchain/design of go, golang came off to me as "let's try to be special and make bizarre design decisions" which made it confusing to learn, not only that but I very quic…

Zig is an excellent middle ground though it doesn't hit the maturity spot - I keep on having to update build.zig with most releases. That said, what exactly was the issue you had with Go?

Basically the type system, most rust projects usually don’t come near “The advanced Reason there’s rust” and if they do need that there’re hardcore libraries for that, an ecosystem like that usually suffers from exhaustion cause no dev will want to maintain just a library and this is also the good apart of rust cause it lessens the barrier into the language as the ecosystem gets bigger

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#164

Post by demi56 »

kelnos wrote: post #91
jvanderbot wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes the intersection of compiled performant and web is mostly filled by Go.

It would be great to introduce some competition there, then! (Not only because I think competition is good, but because I really do not enjoy writing Go.)

Nobody enjoys writing Go but there’s a reason do code in Go and we can’t ignore it

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#165

Post by adastra22 »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #152
adastra22 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect that’s true. I never blindingly copy LLM generated code (that would be recklessly stupid), but I often only quick skim rust code generated this way, just to make sure the general task it is solving is what I asked for. If there is an unhandled edge case or or memory handling bug, rust will catch it.

It's also easier to implement a generate_code -> check_for_errors -> give_error_to_llm -> fix_code loop, because the errors that rust throws at you are most of the time really well thought out, and as succint as usefully possible. Comparing it with python, where you have to write custom parsing to trim it down and even then it's hit and miss on where the actual error lies, it's not even funny.

Rust’s compiler errors is definitely one of the selling points of the language.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#166

Post by satvikpendem »

devjab wrote: post #10

> I like to make silly things, and I also like to put in minimal effort for those silly things. I also like to make things in Rust… I think this part is perhaps the silliest part of a very silly article. If you really like to put in a minimal effort then why on earth would you use Rust? If you want efficiency, memory management and a compiled modern language just use Go. Then you won’t even need anything but the stan…

I use Rust primarily due to the type system. I could use OCaml of course but its a tooling nightmare compared to cargo. The fact that Rust is fast by default is just a plus.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#168

Post by pjmlp »

troad wrote: post #87
devjab wrote: post #10

> I like to make silly things, and I also like to put in minimal effort for those silly things. I also like to make things in Rust… I think this part is perhaps the silliest part of a very silly article. If you really like to put in a minimal effort then why on earth would you use Rust? If you want efficiency, memory management and a compiled modern language just use Go. Then you won’t even need anything but the stan…

I am a fan of Rust for systems programming, but so many people are using Rust for things that are nothing even remotely close to systems programming. So many projects you see being written (or rewritten) in Rust are projects where I just think 'wait, why can't this just have a GC'? And then you look at the code base, and it's all Arc >s, and you can't help at marvel at this, since that's just GC, so what's the benefi…

Which is a classical example of everything is a nail.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#169

Post by satvikpendem »

CharlieDigital wrote: post #100
troad wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a fan of Rust for systems programming, but so many people are using Rust for things that are nothing even remotely close to systems programming. So many projects you see being written (or rewritten) in Rust are projects where I just think 'wait, why can't this just have a GC'? And then you look at the code base, and it's all Arc >s, and you can't help at marvel at this, since that's just GC, so what's the benefi…

> I think a lot of what people actually like about Rust, to be honest, is that it's essentially an ML language masquerading as a C-like, with a stellar packaging and tooling story. F# seems like a good option.

How is F# on non-Microsoft platforms, is it fully cross platform? I don't use C#, .NET, or F# so I have no idea about the ecosystem.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#170

Post by chrismorgan »

troad wrote: post #87
devjab wrote: post #10

> I like to make silly things, and I also like to put in minimal effort for those silly things. I also like to make things in Rust… I think this part is perhaps the silliest part of a very silly article. If you really like to put in a minimal effort then why on earth would you use Rust? If you want efficiency, memory management and a compiled modern language just use Go. Then you won’t even need anything but the stan…

I am a fan of Rust for systems programming, but so many people are using Rust for things that are nothing even remotely close to systems programming. So many projects you see being written (or rewritten) in Rust are projects where I just think 'wait, why can't this just have a GC'? And then you look at the code base, and it's all Arc >s, and you can't help at marvel at this, since that's just GC, so what's the benefi…

> Don't @ me, ARC is GC.

Don’t know if you intended this joke, but some time before Rust 1.0, @ was the sigil for garbage collection types (@T, like &T these days). Which I think was just reference counting, without even a cycle collector, because was shown to be undesirable before it could be improved.

Post reply on HN