4 ms·

I have been learning Rust on and off this year. I have been writing mostly GO for the past few years, but am moving to coding almost primarily in Rust for any n

I have been learning Rust on and off this year. I have been writing mostly GO for the past few years, but am moving to coding almost primarily in Rust for any new project, and porting over some older ones. Microservices, Data Layer, etc... Honestly, while not perfect, its one of the most beautiful languages I have ever come across. Plus, I have not enjoyed coding in a language this much in a while.

dev_dull 8y ago
How does your team (E.g., the people on the hook for reviewing/supporting/contributing to your project) feel about the change? This is a big difference when moving from Go. A language that nobody calls beautiful, but is very easy for a team to contribute to and support (relative to other languages).
- cdoxsey 8y ago
  I don't think that's fair. I'm not entirely sure what beautiful means for a programming language, but I've seen many examples of Go programs which exhibited a beautiful simplicity. This project for example: https://github.com/inconshreveable/slt https://github.com/inconshreveable/slt.
  - dev_dull 8y ago
    I didn’t mean to knock Go. It’s just that when I ask people what they love about it, nobody usually expresses a “feeling” they have when they use it.
    - ammaskartik 8y ago
      Yes I agree. Beauty is highly subjective when it comes to programming languages. Its definitely an expression of a feeling from use and relative successes/failures. I know people I highly respect that call C# with Linq & its lambda implementation very beautiful, and I can see why, but I have not a strong opinion one way or another on it. I had a lot fun when initially learning Rust, and the way I have phased it in to the projects (work & home) that I have been doing has led to successes, which definitely increases my bias towards the fact rust is awesome =).
  - weberc2 8y ago
    I think it’s different kinds of beauty. When I write Go, my good programs are “beautiful” for how simple they are; it’s relatively difficult to over-abstract. It’s the rugged practicality. The other kind of beauty is a quest for an abstraction that makes everything conceptually simple—once you understand the abstraction. It’s more of a mathematical elegance thing, and it’s just gravy if it happens to solve a real world problem.
- ammaskartik 8y ago
  Like I said, we are using it for new code bases, and not moving all of our existing Go Code, thats doing fine. I agree that GO is very easy, I can get most any dev up and running and comfortable on Go in about a week. Honestly though, I can get a decent dev going on Rust in a week. Even with Go, if I was teaching a NodeJS dev, I would get them going on everything but goroutines & channels, and then ease them into it. With Rust, I feel to a Go dev, the syntax isnt too foreign. Plus, focus on understanding ownership & borrowing with real examples relevant to the team, then have them focus on core language features, and then branch out, how you would do with any language. We see a noticeable uptick in performance, and Rust has been well received. Yes Go's ecosystem now is well established, but when trying to do Location intelligence software back in 2014/2015 with Go was a pain from memory. I am not bashing GO, been a gopher for a while, but I do love Rust, and IMHO is not too complex. It just makes sense.
- ammaskartik 8y ago
  One more point here, I wouldnt have done it if I did not get full support & enthusiasm from my team. But I guess sometimes it helps when you dont have HUGE existing code bases to have to justify to port. =)
  - dev_dull 8y ago
    All good points thanks for the response.
- ammaskartik 8y ago
  One more final point while I was thinking. I am a fan of both languages, Go & Rust. Go is in-fact still my recommended languages for teams, and until Rust hits a maturity level that wont change, but I am a big fan fo what rust is trying to become, I am using it for new code because of the problem fit, and I believe both ecosystems can co-exist. Go is also introducing some nice long awaited features (hopefully) in a decent way.

dev_dull 8y ago

How does your team (E.g., the people on the hook for reviewing/supporting/contributing to your project) feel about the change? This is a big difference when moving from Go. A language that nobody calls beautiful, but is very easy for a team to contribute to and support (relative to other languages).

cdoxsey 8y ago
I don't think that's fair. I'm not entirely sure what beautiful means for a programming language, but I've seen many examples of Go programs which exhibited a beautiful simplicity. This project for example: https://github.com/inconshreveable/slt https://github.com/inconshreveable/slt.
- dev_dull 8y ago
  I didn’t mean to knock Go. It’s just that when I ask people what they love about it, nobody usually expresses a “feeling” they have when they use it.
  - ammaskartik 8y ago
    Yes I agree. Beauty is highly subjective when it comes to programming languages. Its definitely an expression of a feeling from use and relative successes/failures. I know people I highly respect that call C# with Linq & its lambda implementation very beautiful, and I can see why, but I have not a strong opinion one way or another on it. I had a lot fun when initially learning Rust, and the way I have phased it in to the projects (work & home) that I have been doing has led to successes, which definitely increases my bias towards the fact rust is awesome =).
- weberc2 8y ago
  I think it’s different kinds of beauty. When I write Go, my good programs are “beautiful” for how simple they are; it’s relatively difficult to over-abstract. It’s the rugged practicality. The other kind of beauty is a quest for an abstraction that makes everything conceptually simple—once you understand the abstraction. It’s more of a mathematical elegance thing, and it’s just gravy if it happens to solve a real world problem.
ammaskartik 8y ago
Like I said, we are using it for new code bases, and not moving all of our existing Go Code, thats doing fine. I agree that GO is very easy, I can get most any dev up and running and comfortable on Go in about a week. Honestly though, I can get a decent dev going on Rust in a week. Even with Go, if I was teaching a NodeJS dev, I would get them going on everything but goroutines & channels, and then ease them into it. With Rust, I feel to a Go dev, the syntax isnt too foreign. Plus, focus on understanding ownership & borrowing with real examples relevant to the team, then have them focus on core language features, and then branch out, how you would do with any language. We see a noticeable uptick in performance, and Rust has been well received. Yes Go's ecosystem now is well established, but when trying to do Location intelligence software back in 2014/2015 with Go was a pain from memory. I am not bashing GO, been a gopher for a while, but I do love Rust, and IMHO is not too complex. It just makes sense.
ammaskartik 8y ago
One more point here, I wouldnt have done it if I did not get full support & enthusiasm from my team. But I guess sometimes it helps when you dont have HUGE existing code bases to have to justify to port. =)
- dev_dull 8y ago
  All good points thanks for the response.
ammaskartik 8y ago
One more final point while I was thinking. I am a fan of both languages, Go & Rust. Go is in-fact still my recommended languages for teams, and until Rust hits a maturity level that wont change, but I am a big fan fo what rust is trying to become, I am using it for new code because of the problem fit, and I believe both ecosystems can co-exist. Go is also introducing some nice long awaited features (hopefully) in a decent way.