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

231–240 of 395 posts

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#231

Post by palmfacehn »

I wouldn't mind a Rust based web framework that provides the same features as the base Servlet API. Everything else should be an optional library. When I look into it the rabbit hole goes too deep. It hasn't been immediately clear what the templating looks like. Usually they start talking about some "Reactive" framework, features I don't want and I lose interest. Afterwards, I realize that I'm already satisfied with my current web stack.

Jetty, HAProxy, JSTL, commons db connection pooling and Postgres.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#232

Post by LtdJorge »

mathw wrote: post #204
mrbonner wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think RC and clone are the way people begin to use Rust. While lots of criticism are against this usage for not idiomatic, it should be acceptable. Coming from Python, nodejs or Ruby, even RC and clone or stack based variables is still a magnitude faster than those languages. When it's about absolute control for performance you can drop down a notch to the borrow checker behavior.

That's an interesting perspective I'd not considered before. Maybe there are different "registers" of Rust, in the same sense that linguists talk about registers in human languages, where you use your language differently for different purposes. And thus, maybe if you're writing something that doesn't need to be screamingly fast absolutely all the time there's a register of Rust where putting lots of things in Rc > i…

I think Rc> could be simplified to Rc.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#233

Post by berkes »

biztos wrote: post #228
berkes wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that are nothing even remotely close to systems programming This is unnecessary gatekeeping. It also shows your lack of perspective. Or, rather, your lack of imagining other perspectives, probably. Sure, rust is primarily a language aimed at systems programming. But it also is so much more (and also a cult). * Its type system is excellent. Especially the lack of a "null". Even if, like me, you're fine with a GC, th…

I like Rust, but wasn’t “plopping” a binary onto a server and running it one of the original virtues of Go? Arguably a louder “plop” due to size, but then you don’t have to chmod.

Certainly.

A lot (all?) of the points I make aren't unique to rust, or even invented in rust. Many have even better implementations in other languages. Go also invented the "fmt", with one opinionated code style "enforced" by default - bikeshedding be gone!

My point was that it's the combination of all of these points. AFAIK, go ticks many of these boxes too. But for me golang falls short with mutability, and with the type system (though that one's catching up really fast). It's the "package-deal" that I like about rust.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#234

Post by drpossum »

Capricorn2481 wrote: post #147
drpossum wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every application or even web application bottlenecks at the network or database level.

Doesn't really answer the question. Most webapps are this way and people are still surprisingly unaware of this.

It is a refutation of the premise which invalidates this particular question as it was posed.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#236

Post by masklinn »

ActorNightly wrote: post #71
creatonez wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer for why folks are so inclined towards doing high-level tasks in Rust... is the type system. Its sensibilities are in a sweet spot that makes it very easy to pull off huge refactors. It was also a lot of people's first introduction to algebraic data types being used in nearly all error handling (its usage of `Result where E implements Error` and lack of nulls or exceptions). It makes a lot of progress towar…

Typing in modern days is effectively moving the task of debugging to compile/ide annotations process instead of testing for correctness. Albeit it makes the process easier compared to a really shittly written code without strict typing, but against good codebases, it takes the same amount of time.

> instead of testing for correctness.

Except you can’t test for correctness. Tests can’t prove the absence of bugs.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#237

Post by skor »

for those folks suggesting php/laravel, give cakephp a try. I've used both extensively: years and large, complex projects. Cake is just much faster to work in. In the initial phase and the long run.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#238

Post by masklinn »

palmfacehn wrote: post #231

I wouldn't mind a Rust based web framework that provides the same features as the base Servlet API. Everything else should be an optional library. When I look into it the rabbit hole goes too deep. It hasn't been immediately clear what the templating looks like. Usually they start talking about some "Reactive" framework, features I don't want and I lose interest. Afterwards, I realize that I'm already satisfied with…

It’s really not clear what you mean by “basic servlet API”, because the main rust web frameworks are pretty much just routing by default, with (largely opt-in) parsing and serialisation support.

It “hasn’t been clear what the templating looks” like because there isn’t any just as AFAIK servlets provide no templating.

Re: Rust needs a web framework

#240

Post by pyrale »

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…

> and a compiled modern language

Let's just say different people have different opinions on this one. Personally, I find Go to be a big regression in language design given modern PLT research, and wouldn't use it unless forced (e.g. terraform providers). Other people have other opinions: a friend I respect a lot has great success in the Go community.

I'm telling you that because if, as a Go enjoyer, you're baffled by the writings of a Rust enjoyer, it's very likely the result of different perspectives rather than silliness. And if your conclusion is "just use go", you're probably the one being silly.

Post reply on HN