3 ms·
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with Rust the language in this context, but an API server doesn't really let Rust play to its relative strengths
by skewart 11y ago
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with Rust the language in this context, but an API server doesn't really let Rust play to its relative strengths. Response times are more likely to be DB or I/O bound than anything else, so you'reprobably not improving response time much compared to Ruby or Python (of course, that's not always true though). Also, the ecosystem seems immature enough still that you'd inevitably have to reinvent at least a few wheels.
That said, I think it's great to do things like this. Someone has to pave the way. And, if a good API/web ecosystem builds up in Rust there's no reason _not_ to use it.
At the moment though, I think a more _natural_ fit for Rust would be for something a little lower level than an API server.
- 6d65 11y agoStatic linking i.e. having one single binary to drop onto a server, and most likely lower memory consumption(more concurrent users served by a single box). These two could probably be added to a list of reasons.
- bschwindHN 11y agoThat is a huge reason I'm interested in Rust for backend web programming. I love the ease of use NPM provides when it comes to installing dependencies. Installing libraries is definitely a pain point in something like a C++ project. Cargo is like NPM but the end result is a native executable. And if you have a lot of users, Rust can help lower your monthly bill by requiring fewer resources. The safer memory guarantees from the compiler is a great bonus on top of all that.