4 ms·
> Rust is great for writing high-performance code, or code that needs to be parallelised within a single process. However if performance is not a concern then a
by Jweb_Guru 9y ago
> Rust is great for writing high-performance code, or code that needs to be parallelised within a single process. However if performance is not a concern then a statically typed language with a GC is usually a better choice.
Are there Rust programmers who disagree with that?
- steveklabnik 9y agoIt depends on context. I don't think many would disagree that it would be easier, but better is very broad. Better in what way? For what purpose? For example, if you already know Rust, then "easier" may (or may not, depending on what sense of easy you mean!) not be a compelling argument. Rust is certainly not the best tool for every single task, but it also has broader applicability than "I can't possibly accept a GC."
- Jweb_Guru 9y agoI use Rust for all sorts of things that don't need to be high performance, because I know Rust very well. But I don't think it's the ideal choice for most of those tasks--although I will say that I wish more languages had (for example) the same approach to namespacing that Rust takes, or as nice of a package manager, those are things that could coexist with a very different language. I imagine most Rust programmers would agree...