5 ms·

Well, every two languages are different, but at least for systems programming, Golang unfortunately started to replace Python, but given how vitally important s

Well, every two languages are different, but at least for systems programming, Golang unfortunately started to replace Python, but given how vitally important security is in that domain, Rust makes a lot more sense than Golang, won't you agree?

steveklabnik 9y ago
I don't think "systems programming" is a coherent concept anymore, so I'd reject the premise of the question. Go has already moved away from that word, Rust will be as well. That you see them as being so different languages reinforces my premise above; they're good at different things, so comparing them doesn't always make a ton of sense.
- nikolay 9y ago
  I have to agree with you.
Thaxll 9y ago
gVisor is a security product ( Container Runtime Sandbox ) made by Google in Go and runs in production so I'm not sure what you mean by "how vitally important security is in that domain". https://github.com/google/gvisor https://github.com/google/gvisor
- nikolay 9y ago
  Rust is much safer by both design and implementation programming language. Google is emotionally attached to Golang, which was born at Google.
  - Thaxll 9y ago
    How is it much safer? Sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.
    - steveklabnik 9y ago
      One could make an argument about data races, for example. Rust prevents them at compile time, Go does not. You could also make an argument about compile-time guarantees more generally. I'm not sure it's really a great argument, but you could make it. I think the parent's statement that it's only Go because it's made by Google is demonstrably false.
      - Thaxll 9y ago
        One could make the same kind of argument with GC lang vs none GC ( RAII doesn't protect from everything ). OP said "much safer" Rust is not much safer than Go, maybe it is safer but definitely not "much safer"
        steveklabnik 9y ago
        Sure, that’s why I think it’s not a spectacular argument.
    - nikolay 9y ago
      It sounds like you have no idea about Rust.
      - Thaxll 9y ago
        You're the one that said "Google is emotionally attached to Golang, which was born at Google." which is really stupid tbh you think engineers at Google pick up tech because they're "emotionally attached"? Those smart people took the tool that fits their needs.
        nikolay 9y ago
        I'm sorry, but Google isn't some role model with high values. On the contrary, it makes most of its money from selling our dirty underwear to merchants.
        9y ago
- roca 9y ago
  gVisor is not a good poster child for Go. It hacks generics into Go via a preprocessor!
  - cube2222 9y ago
    I'd say on the contrary. They chose it even while knowing they'll gonna need to hack generics. (Same in k8s, generics hacked together in a few different ways)
    - roca 9y ago
      You're starting from the assumption that the Google developers took a clear-eyed decision on the merits, which I don't share.
      - cube2222 9y ago
        What do you suggest guided their decision?
        roca 9y ago
        It's quite likely that, being at Google, they were already familiar with Go, people around them were using it, and there was a comfort factor with it being a Google project. It's rational to take these factors into account, but they don't reflect on the merits of the language itself, and aren't necessarily transferable to other people choosing programming languages.
Sharlin 9y ago
Once you start putting "systems programming" and "Python" in the same sentence you can be pretty sure that the term "systems programming" has lost all meaning. Or at least using it without elaborating is only going to end up in confusion.
- stmw 9y ago
  Python is for systems programming like your fist is for hammering nails -- it will be slow, and there will be blood.
  - nikolay 9y ago
    Very nicely put!
  - sriram_malhar 9y ago
    Perhaps one could say that about systems programming languages as well, including Rust. It'll be slow(er) to develop, and there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth. The word "systems" is increasingly relegated to a smaller fraction of the codespace than used to be; one wouldn't have considered building a high frequency trading system or a call handling system in a non C/C++ language in the mid 90's, but Java and Erlang get the job done well enough. As always Alan Perlis said it best (in his "epigrams of programming"): A programming language is low level when its programs require attention to the irrelevant!

steveklabnik 9y ago

I don't think "systems programming" is a coherent concept anymore, so I'd reject the premise of the question. Go has already moved away from that word, Rust will be as well. That you see them as being so different languages reinforces my premise above; they're good at different things, so comparing them doesn't always make a ton of sense.

nikolay 9y ago
I have to agree with you.

Thaxll 9y ago

gVisor is a security product ( Container Runtime Sandbox ) made by Google in Go and runs in production so I'm not sure what you mean by "how vitally important security is in that domain". https://github.com/google/gvisor https://github.com/google/gvisor

nikolay 9y ago
Rust is much safer by both design and implementation programming language. Google is emotionally attached to Golang, which was born at Google.
- Thaxll 9y ago
  How is it much safer? Sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.
  - steveklabnik 9y ago
    One could make an argument about data races, for example. Rust prevents them at compile time, Go does not. You could also make an argument about compile-time guarantees more generally. I'm not sure it's really a great argument, but you could make it. I think the parent's statement that it's only Go because it's made by Google is demonstrably false.
    - Thaxll 9y ago
      One could make the same kind of argument with GC lang vs none GC ( RAII doesn't protect from everything ). OP said "much safer" Rust is not much safer than Go, maybe it is safer but definitely not "much safer"
      - steveklabnik 9y ago
        Sure, that’s why I think it’s not a spectacular argument.
  - nikolay 9y ago
    It sounds like you have no idea about Rust.
    - Thaxll 9y ago
      You're the one that said "Google is emotionally attached to Golang, which was born at Google." which is really stupid tbh you think engineers at Google pick up tech because they're "emotionally attached"? Those smart people took the tool that fits their needs.
      - nikolay 9y ago
        I'm sorry, but Google isn't some role model with high values. On the contrary, it makes most of its money from selling our dirty underwear to merchants.
        9y ago
roca 9y ago
gVisor is not a good poster child for Go. It hacks generics into Go via a preprocessor!
- cube2222 9y ago
  I'd say on the contrary. They chose it even while knowing they'll gonna need to hack generics. (Same in k8s, generics hacked together in a few different ways)
  - roca 9y ago
    You're starting from the assumption that the Google developers took a clear-eyed decision on the merits, which I don't share.
    - cube2222 9y ago
      What do you suggest guided their decision?
      - roca 9y ago
        It's quite likely that, being at Google, they were already familiar with Go, people around them were using it, and there was a comfort factor with it being a Google project. It's rational to take these factors into account, but they don't reflect on the merits of the language itself, and aren't necessarily transferable to other people choosing programming languages.

Sharlin 9y ago

Once you start putting "systems programming" and "Python" in the same sentence you can be pretty sure that the term "systems programming" has lost all meaning. Or at least using it without elaborating is only going to end up in confusion.

stmw 9y ago
Python is for systems programming like your fist is for hammering nails -- it will be slow, and there will be blood.
- nikolay 9y ago
  Very nicely put!
- sriram_malhar 9y ago
  Perhaps one could say that about systems programming languages as well, including Rust. It'll be slow(er) to develop, and there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth. The word "systems" is increasingly relegated to a smaller fraction of the codespace than used to be; one wouldn't have considered building a high frequency trading system or a call handling system in a non C/C++ language in the mid 90's, but Java and Erlang get the job done well enough. As always Alan Perlis said it best (in his "epigrams of programming"): A programming language is low level when its programs require attention to the irrelevant!