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

Four Years of Rust

blog.rust-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 203 posts

Re: Four Years of Rust

#91

Post by panpanna »

AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #84
Waterluvian wrote: post #5

I love watching Rust progress. But the #1 thing I'm watching is the RLS and vscode plugin. Maybe I'm weird but I work with so many languages that having to manage multiple editors is a non-start. So any time I have a little personal project that could be done in Rust (for learning) I end up using Go or Python instead because the vscode support is still quite buggy. Naturally others will say you don't need IDE-like su…

Before Vim I had to look for an editor every time I learned a new language. Now I just use Vim. For everything.

Well, there are two ways to interpret that :)

Re: Four Years of Rust

#92

Post by fnordsensei »

AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #84
Waterluvian wrote: post #5

I love watching Rust progress. But the #1 thing I'm watching is the RLS and vscode plugin. Maybe I'm weird but I work with so many languages that having to manage multiple editors is a non-start. So any time I have a little personal project that could be done in Rust (for learning) I end up using Go or Python instead because the vscode support is still quite buggy. Naturally others will say you don't need IDE-like su…

Before Vim I had to look for an editor every time I learned a new language. Now I just use Vim. For everything.

Try :q!

On a more serious note: I have a long-term goal to learn either Vim or Emacs for various reasons, the above mentioned being one of them.

It's hard to feel so spectacularly unproductive as I do when I try them out though, so it's easy to give up.

What's there best way to go about learning Vim or Emacs?

Re: Four Years of Rust

#93

Post by bgilroy26 »

fnordsensei wrote: post #92
AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Vim I had to look for an editor every time I learned a new language. Now I just use Vim. For everything.

Try :q! On a more serious note: I have a long-term goal to learn either Vim or Emacs for various reasons, the above mentioned being one of them. It's hard to feel so spectacularly unproductive as I do when I try them out though, so it's easy to give up. What's there best way to go about learning Vim or Emacs?

I learned by playing vim adventures, but that might be too kiddie for you.

Check out this old HN post[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=213054

Re: Four Years of Rust

#94

Post by jamil7 »

fnordsensei wrote: post #92
AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Vim I had to look for an editor every time I learned a new language. Now I just use Vim. For everything.

Try :q! On a more serious note: I have a long-term goal to learn either Vim or Emacs for various reasons, the above mentioned being one of them. It's hard to feel so spectacularly unproductive as I do when I try them out though, so it's easy to give up. What's there best way to go about learning Vim or Emacs?

Not sure about emacs but vim basically requires a period of fighting through how horribly unproductive you will initially be, give it a week or two and you'll be ok.

Re: Four Years of Rust

#95

Post by agumonkey »

thrower123 wrote: post #33
wyatwerp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you describing the D language? https://dlang.org C-like syntax and execution speed with high-level scripting-language-like conveniences, close to Lisp-level ability to generate code at compile time, an active user-base ( https://forum.dlang.org ) that continuously strives to get the language improved. Its (thread-local) memory heap is GC'd by default. They also have an LLVM back-end if that is pertinent. Recently…

D is a weird one, because it has been lurking around for at least a decade and a half without really picking up the kind of steam and hype that later entrants have. I remember dabbling with D for game development way back in high school, as a friendlier alternative to C++.

Success is often a matter of time. A good idea too early is the wrong idea kind of thinking.

Re: Four Years of Rust

#96

Post by deathanatos »

Thank you, so much, to all the people that have put so many hours into making Rust what it is today.

Rust, for me, took what was, prior to learning Rust, a vague undefined notion and really helped me see it formalized into what I can now really call a "mental model" of ownership/lifetimes. It has made my code better in every language I work in.

Re: Four Years of Rust

#97

Post by wyatwerp »

pimeys wrote: post #90
wyatwerp wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking nothing away from the Rust community that has managed such a complex language so well so long, I have to say that there never was anything viable in the no-GC no-runtime niche (that is why it is a niche - otherwise why would anybody be using GC'd languages). We were/are just gritting and bearing C++. If it is a typical program, i.e. not a device driver or OS kernel running on low-memory hardware, having a GC +…

Having a GC also kind of makes it nasty to write libraries to other GC'd languages. In Rust all of this is very easy, and you can get the speed bump to your Ruby/Python/JavaScript libraries using a modern and safe language.

Is the speed bump for other-language libraries or for other-language applications?

For speeding up other-language libraries, D has a -betterC mode, which prevents you from using the subset of the language and the libraries (standard & user-defined) that relies on GC. The remaining language is a very clean C that simply works on the other language's GC'd memory (using the other language's C interface), and can use stack allocation or any heap allocation strategy of your choice for its working set (reference counting ala C++ shared_ptr could be the obvious choice, but it is your party).

For other language applications, it is a valid option to speed up the entire application by writing it in D, as it has "all" the features of those other languages + all the convenience that is afforded by a GC + threads if you don't want a multi-process design. I quote "all" because I mean useful things like blocks/closures, generic data structures, etc. - of course, neither Rust nor D give you runtime devices like monkey-patching/meta-class hackery/prototype changes.

Re: Four Years of Rust

#98

Post by wtetzner »

msvan wrote: post #86
wtetzner wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love OCaml, but my biggest pain point is not having something like Cargo. I haven't spent a lot of time with opam since 2.0 came out, so maybe it's better now, but when I used it it felt very much designed around installing packages globally, instead of defining dependencies per-project. The other issue with the package ecosystem is cross-platform support. While OCaml itself works on windows, opam doesn't (or at le…

Esy ( https://esy.sh/ ) has completely solved the first problem, fwiw.

Thank you! I'll try it out.

Re: Four Years of Rust

#99

Post by wyatwerp »

fnordsensei wrote: post #92
AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Vim I had to look for an editor every time I learned a new language. Now I just use Vim. For everything.

Try :q! On a more serious note: I have a long-term goal to learn either Vim or Emacs for various reasons, the above mentioned being one of them. It's hard to feel so spectacularly unproductive as I do when I try them out though, so it's easy to give up. What's there best way to go about learning Vim or Emacs?

This is going further & further OT, but hey - I didn't start it!

What you need is a motivating factor. Vim is almost guaranteed to be there on any Linux/BSD/Mac shell environment, which motivates people in those environments to learn it even if they learn no other editor.

Beyond such environments, like on any desktop GUI, what'd motivate you to try GUI Vim? For Emacs, I can say the integration between any set of tools you can imagine could be a motivation.

The reason Emacs users don't particularly appreciate IDE's is that Emacs' integration of code editor, compiler output, debugger control makes the development cycle extremely fast. Add any 1 more use to that. File explorer? Emacs dired. Process monitor? Emacs proced. Interactive shells? Emacs integrates Unix shell, Python sessions, anything interactive actually.

You will get all your work done in Emacs, just using editor operations! Go to the source code for a compiler error? Hit "Enter" or click on the error in the compile window. Go to the source code being debugged? Stepping in the debugger automatically opens the file at the right line number. Found the bug? The code is already there ready to be fixed; switch to the compile window & compile. Find a file in a directory? Do a text search in its dired window. Rename all files beginning with foo to begin with bar instead? Do a search-replace.

Emacs also scales way better than any desktop editor or Vim, whether it is opening GB-sized log files, or binary files viewed/edited in hexadecimal. Before long, you start managing your to-do's using org-mode, and doing all your Git operations in the insanely featureful Magit interface.

The list gets longer and longer every release. And many Linux shell environments support the same basic keyboard short-cuts (Ctrl-A to go to beginning of line, Ctrl-E to go to the end, Ctrl-R to search in the shell history), and also provide light-weight Emacs clones like 'zile', 'mg' for editing-only use in the terminal.

Re: Four Years of Rust

#100

Post by rudedogg »

pornel wrote: post #76
msvan wrote: post #11

I wonder how many Rust users really want linear types and borrow checking, instead of the other stuff Rust brings to the table: modern language design, large and friendly community, nice type system, native compilation, good package ecosystem. Personally I would prefer a well-designed GC'd language with a strong type system and native compilation over Rust, unless I was doing something with specific demands on parall…

There are already several decent GC languages. If Rust was just another GC language, I don't think it would have attracted such a strong community required to develop all of these things and break out of obscurity. It'd be another Go with generics, or Elixir-native, or Swift with uglier syntax. In the no-GC no-runtime niche for a very long time there was nothing viable besides C and C++. For programmers who want C-li…

> It'd be another Go with generics, or Elixir-native, or Swift with uglier syntax.

I just want to point out that the Swift package management situation is currently bad. SPM (https://github.com/apple/swift-package-manager) can't be used within Xcode, and is basically not used for anything outside of server-side swift / Linux.

It also doesn't look like SPM will be integrated with Xcode this WWDC, so you're stuck with CocoaPods or Carthage.

I'm really jealous of cargo. And RLS (Swift LSP doesn't really work well because it doesn't know about your dependencies - back to the package manager issue).

Post reply on HN