4 ms·

The compile time guarantees that Rust provides are good for web server code not a web app. This responsibly should and must be shifted to the people writing web

The compile time guarantees that Rust provides are good for web server code not a web app. This responsibly should and must be shifted to the people writing web server code not web applications. There are many nuances with rust and it is a hard language to use and learn, when libraries which you want to use dont compile, or your code than doesn't compile for 100 reasons. I get it, it is a great language, but only for Computer Scientists. For average WebDevelopers it may not be that useful to write web apps with compile time guarantees on memory safety.

pcwalton 9y ago
Speaking as an engineer who (maybe surprisingly) isn't particularly interested in type theory for its own sake, I like the fact that Rust has an expressive type/macro system and an ecosystem that takes advantage of it, yet compiles to native binaries. The low-level memory management isn't much of a problem for me since I've internalized the rules, and the same system prevents nasty problems like data races. Of course, different tools work well for different projects and different people's styles. If you needed me to write a CRUD Web app as quickly as possible I'd probably use Rails. After learning Rust and working with Rocket, though, I think most programmers will find the development experience enjoyable for lots of Web apps. I was pleasantly surprised at how elegant Rocket is.
- pankajdoharey 9y ago
  See the post is about using Rust on the frontend. In my opinion it is not a suitable place for Go or Rust due to their large runtimes that needs to be transpiled. Even with webassembly the Runtime size would be huge. So it is not suited for the frontend. As far as backend is concerned the decreasing order of difficulty to write the same code seems something like this to me Rust -> Haskell -> Go -> Ruby -> Clojure.
  - burntsushi 9y ago
    Rust does not have a large runtime.

pcwalton 9y ago

Speaking as an engineer who (maybe surprisingly) isn't particularly interested in type theory for its own sake, I like the fact that Rust has an expressive type/macro system and an ecosystem that takes advantage of it, yet compiles to native binaries. The low-level memory management isn't much of a problem for me since I've internalized the rules, and the same system prevents nasty problems like data races. Of course, different tools work well for different projects and different people's styles. If you needed me to write a CRUD Web app as quickly as possible I'd probably use Rails. After learning Rust and working with Rocket, though, I think most programmers will find the development experience enjoyable for lots of Web apps. I was pleasantly surprised at how elegant Rocket is.

pankajdoharey 9y ago
See the post is about using Rust on the frontend. In my opinion it is not a suitable place for Go or Rust due to their large runtimes that needs to be transpiled. Even with webassembly the Runtime size would be huge. So it is not suited for the frontend. As far as backend is concerned the decreasing order of difficulty to write the same code seems something like this to me Rust -> Haskell -> Go -> Ruby -> Clojure.
- burntsushi 9y ago
  Rust does not have a large runtime.