4 ms·
Rust seems more suitable for implementing the next OpenBLAS. While Julia's single language mantra is great, as long as things like Python exist, there will be
by marmaduke 7y ago
Rust seems more suitable for implementing the next OpenBLAS.
While Julia's single language mantra is great, as long as things like Python exist, there will be a need for C/C++/Rust.
- asdjlkadsjklads 7y agoYea, this whole discussion feels weird to me. Different use cases. I love Rust (and dislike Py lol), but from everything i hear a highly dynamic frontend (like Py) has little downsides to authors of ML/etc. All of the hotpaths are in other already because Python is so slow. The only downside i've seen is sometimes the programmer will want more safety. In such a scenario Rust for the "frontend" would be very useful. So we have two concerns, frontend and backend. For the backend Rust would perfectly acceptable, but i'm not sure it is fixing a safety issue/etc in other (C/etc) languages - aka, perhaps little value in the backend. For the frontend it only has value in some areas. Regardless, i love Rust and would totally welcome any tooling to keep me in Rust. However i'm not an ML person hah.
- danielscrubs 7y agoNovel feature engineering is becoming a must. Do you reach for Python or C++? Do you want multiple languages if one was enough?
- MiroF 7y agoA dynamic language can be super frustrating to develop with because you have to keep tensor dimensions memorized in your head or in comments