191–200 of 996 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most people here understand that a language that is great for kernel development isn't necessarily great for everything else.
Oh the language is good, it's the people. Cult-like.
I used to read something similar all the time around 20 years ago: I don't have anything against Jesus. It's his fan club that's a pain in the ass.
This is a very brave post to write given how incendiary responses to rust criticism can be, but this matches my experience entirely.
> incendiary responses to rust criticism can be I've not experienced this. Do you have examples of the rust community flaming someone for having negative opinions about the language?
Hopefully they calm down, or really get drown out, once there are a real number of jobs for people using Rust. Right now the evangelists outnumber the rank and file who are just using a language to get work done.
The Rust community is one of the top arguments against rust. I've never before been so condescended to as when attempting to ask questions there. Their lack of care for perf also drives me up a wall. Anytime they propose adding an extra layer of indirection to get around the borrow checker, I have to explain yet again that with the way modern CPUs work, extra layers of indirection have serious cache-related perf cost…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust is not antithetical to iteration-based programming, it just makes you write a lot of heavy boilerplate to explicitly support that kind of style. The flip side of that is once the 'iteration'/'prototyping' phase is over, you can actually refactor the prototype into high-quality production code, instead of either throwing it away altogether and rewriting it from scratch (spoiler alert: this doesn't really happen m…
No, Rust is pretty antithetical to iteration-based programming. The language basically requires you to plan for the ownership model from the beginning, and it can be quite difficult to retrofit a changed ownership model into an existing program. I've run into this in a side project I'm working on, where my indecision over which ownership models are actually workable in the API to satisfy the needs I have means almost…
> As far as a game is concerned, there is only one audio system, one input system, one physics world, one deltaTime, one renderer, one asset loader. I thought this way when I was doing Java dev around 10 years ago. I thought it excused the singleton pattern. I was wrong! You should always be able to construct an object by explicitly passing dependencies to it. Especially for testing. It really is no fun if your rende…
Rust... what is it good for? "Systems programming" ... Rust is not good for raw performance. Neither for prototyping and iteration. Personally I think operating systems (kernels) should be as performant as possible, and C/C++ has been good enough for decades. Anyone really unhappy with Linux/BSD/Windows/macOS performance? What systems are we talking about that benefits from Rust? Advanced weapon systems that should a…
If that how you want your OS, that's fair enough. But I think a lot of people are happy to trade (to some degree, at least) performance for security, and would prefer that their OSs are as secure as possible first, and as performant as they can be second.
The thing that the Rust community thinks sets them apart (their community), is really the thing holding them back.
The latter part of this is true for any strongly statically typed language (with Rust expanding this to lifetimes), which negates the beginning of this paragraph -- once you get things compiled, you won't need to refactor, unless you are changing major parts of your interfaces. There are plenty of languages that do not have this problem because it is a design choice, hardly something Rust can "fix", it's what makes it Rust.
> Orphan rule should be optional That has got to be the most "I didn't think this through" take ever. While it's a known pain in the ass. Not having it is a bigger pain. The moment you allow this, you have to find a way to pick between several implementation - and they don't always have sane names. Orphan rules prevent this from happening.
Someone who has experienced real problems as a result of a specific mechanism is not required to solve every single problem with alternatives to that mechanism before saying "this mechanism has caused me real problems and it'd be nice if there were a better alternative that didn't cause those problems". > The moment you allow this, you have to find a way to pick between several implementation - and they don't always…
And if the original poster had said that I would be ok. Instead what they said is:
> It's a great example of something I'd call "muh safety", desire for perfection and complete avoidance of all problems at all costs, even if it means significantly worse developer ergonomics.
This implies the writer didn't assume what happens if you "turn-off" orphan rules. I.e. you don't trade perfection for developer ergonomics, you trade one set of developer (ability to write any trait for any type) ergonomics for another (having to battle two incompatible trait implementations from crates you don't own).
Either you have to manually specify how nearly every implementation is pulled (horrible developer ergonomics) or, even worse, you go into monkey patching territory.
> For instance, many applications would be quite happy with "There can be only one implementation", giving a compiler error if there's more than one.
Ok. But you still need a resolution mechanism to fix the error. Which implies manually solving ambiguity. And how do you solve it for blanket implementations?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> * There are very few people doing serious 3D game work in Rust. There's Veloren, and my stuff, and maybe a few others. No big, popular titles. I'd expected some AAA title to be written in Rust by now. That hasn't happened, and it's probably not going to happen, for the reasons the author gives. At one point the studio behind the Finals was writing game server code in Rust with an Unreal engine client. Not sure if t…
Backend 3d code?