31–40 of 133 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One way to reason about what could have been done better from the beginning is looking at stuff that is marked as [deprecated] in the standard library. E.g. how the "try!()" macro was deprecated in favour of the "?" operator.
I think more interesting would be something we're truly stuck with (at least until Rust 2.0, which may never come).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think more interesting would be something we're truly stuck with (at least until Rust 2.0, which may never come).
(Stuff that’s deprecated in the standard library is stuff we’re stuck with; they cannot be removed in editions.)
Rust mods have to stop listening to the elite language intelligentsia. Successful eco systems are pragmatic and idiomatically straightforward. Everything & the kitchen sink in a language is not a recipe for success. Every language that has a long lifespan spent a long time in feature minimal stasis too. The world won't learn a moving target.
Rust mods have to stop listening to the elite language intelligentsia. Successful eco systems are pragmatic and idiomatically straightforward. Everything & the kitchen sink in a language is not a recipe for success. Every language that has a long lifespan spent a long time in feature minimal stasis too. The world won't learn a moving target.
I learned Rust a few years ago and without keeping up with the latest changes too much I still feel confident I can work on current code.
I primarily live in the .Net world, but rust seems extremely close to f# in terms of compiler safety, and I'm trying to decide what programming language to learn next.
Now that there's been 5 years since v1.0, is there any consensus on design mistakes that Rust made? Any mistakes that people wish they could turn back time and do differently but can't because it would break compatibility with too much existing code out there? That's the more interesting list to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While Go may be faster somewhere, that post was not a good comparison. See the discussion around it and the patches made by the community and the final results. See the individual benchmarks: https://github.com/christianscott/levenshtein-distance-bench...
And just to help the lazy people, after making the benchmarked loads equivalent, the results are: hyperfine go/out 'node javascript/main.js' rust/target/release/rust 1 Benchmark #1: go/out Time (mean ± σ): 1.888 s ± 0.013 s [User: 2.040 s, System: 0.045 s] Range (min … max): 1.875 s … 1.918 s 10 runs Benchmark #2: node javascript/main.js Time (mean ± σ): 4.257 s ± 0.033 s [User: 4.295 s, System: 0.042 s] Range (min ……
That PR does not make the benchmark loads "equivalent." Please look at the diff. That PR adds parallelism to the Rust program. The Go program does not have parallelism.
Is now the time to start learning rust? In your estimation, are there going to be lots of job opportunities for people who have 15 years experience with rust? I primarily live in the .Net world, but rust seems extremely close to f# in terms of compiler safety, and I'm trying to decide what programming language to learn next.
There's some highly specialist aspects you _could_ learn (like anything I suppose), but I've got enough to get by and be as productive as I'd like without needing to get to that level.
So there's no harm in learning enough to get by for fun.
Compare to e.g. Haskell, which I learned at university, I have a memory that you'd have to invest quite heavily to make it do something useful.
Is now the time to start learning rust? In your estimation, are there going to be lots of job opportunities for people who have 15 years experience with rust? I primarily live in the .Net world, but rust seems extremely close to f# in terms of compiler safety, and I'm trying to decide what programming language to learn next.