4 ms·

This is more of a general observation but why are Rust and Go so often mentioned in the same sentence? They are designed around very different use cases such th

This is more of a general observation but why are Rust and Go so often mentioned in the same sentence? They are designed around very different use cases such that a direct comparison doesn't seem to warrant as much attention as it seems to get.

empath75 8y ago
They’re different use-cases but they’re both modern statically typed languages that are ergonomically nice compared to previous alternatives in their spaces.
theshrike79 8y ago
Both are modern languages but with (IMO) vastly different views on how a language should be constructed. Go went with simplicity to a fault. No generics (use code generation instead), just one way to make a loop, garbage collection. Rust on the other hand has all the bells and whistles a language could have combined with the ability to micro manage every bit of memory you're using. People tend to lean either way.
- ChrisSD 8y ago
  But those different "views" are born of their different use cases. Rust is meant to be low level, like C++, and thus micro managing memory is an essential feature it can't do without. Go is meant to be a higher level server side language that replaces languages like php, python or Java on the server. It's simple so it's almost as fast to compile as a scripting language is.
  - apta 8y ago
    Because when golang first came out, it was hyped as a "systems language", and meant to compete with C++. Most people use that term to refer to languages you use to write kernel level software. Of course, contrary to the golang author's wishes, golang ended up being a competitor to python/nodejs/etc. but it's still the case that the marketing hype from when the language first came out affects what people talk about, even if they don't know the context of why that discussion came about in the first place. Rust on the other hand, is a (somewhat) viable C++ replacement, as can be seen in the projects that get implemented in it (e.g. Rust made its way into the Firefox browser, as well as other low level and speed critical networking projects at different companies).

empath75 8y ago

They’re different use-cases but they’re both modern statically typed languages that are ergonomically nice compared to previous alternatives in their spaces.

theshrike79 8y ago

Both are modern languages but with (IMO) vastly different views on how a language should be constructed. Go went with simplicity to a fault. No generics (use code generation instead), just one way to make a loop, garbage collection. Rust on the other hand has all the bells and whistles a language could have combined with the ability to micro manage every bit of memory you're using. People tend to lean either way.

ChrisSD 8y ago
But those different "views" are born of their different use cases. Rust is meant to be low level, like C++, and thus micro managing memory is an essential feature it can't do without. Go is meant to be a higher level server side language that replaces languages like php, python or Java on the server. It's simple so it's almost as fast to compile as a scripting language is.
- apta 8y ago
  Because when golang first came out, it was hyped as a "systems language", and meant to compete with C++. Most people use that term to refer to languages you use to write kernel level software. Of course, contrary to the golang author's wishes, golang ended up being a competitor to python/nodejs/etc. but it's still the case that the marketing hype from when the language first came out affects what people talk about, even if they don't know the context of why that discussion came about in the first place. Rust on the other hand, is a (somewhat) viable C++ replacement, as can be seen in the projects that get implemented in it (e.g. Rust made its way into the Firefox browser, as well as other low level and speed critical networking projects at different companies).