9 ms·

It’s not useless. I for one associate language with their run time properties.. Written in Python - easy to understand, but lacks performance. Probably cant us

It’s not useless. I for one associate language with their run time properties.. Written in Python - easy to understand, but lacks performance. Probably cant use more than 1 CPU core. Needs a lot of memory. Written in Go - fast enough for most cases, all CPU cores, but possibly high mem usage becUse of GC. I need to plan for it. Written in Rust - possibly new and maturing, uses memory effectively, likely to use all cores. Easy to deploy (single binary) Written in JS - probably not for me - personal taste and hate of npm ecosystem. Written in C - probably the best performing, but less robust, no memory safety. So, “written in” helps in judging whether to care for that project or not to some extent.

h91wka 7y ago
Sorry, but by and large that's "red goes faster" type of reasoning.
- jaxwerk 7y ago
  Red is a property of a car totally unrelated to its performance characteristics. The language software is implemented in absolutely has an impact on the performance and behavior of the software. This is more like "Carbon is faster than aluminum." Yeah, it's a generalization, but it's a useful one.
- cgag 7y ago
  I don't know what you people get out of pretending you can't derive much from being told what language something is written in.
michaelcampbell 7y ago
At least it's not Rust-this or that-4-Rust. The bundling of the language in the title of the app is a fad I hope I see the end of. Yes, Python, we get that you wrote WhateverPy in Python.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- staticassertion 7y ago
  This, for me, is due to lack of package namespacing in these languages. Someone took 'xyz' ? Well I guess I'm going to be 'xyz-rs'
- weberc2 7y ago
  Rust has its own -rs thing going on.
  - CameronNemo 7y ago
    Mostly for bindings though.
    - weberc2 7y ago
      Ah, that would make sense. I’ll have to take your word for it.
ludjer 7y ago
where is Java in the list :D
brobinson 7y ago
For me, I primarily think about stability: Python/Go/JS/C -> runtime crashes due to type errors and/or data races Rust -> no runtime crashes due to type errors/data races
- makapuf 7y ago
  Why would go and c which have static typing suffer from type errors ? Why would go that has a data race checker and quite good concurrency primitives be more prone that rust ? Rust seems to have its merits but I find the parent post more level headed in that it tries to characterize language runtime, admittedly subjectively but not in a rust==good, rest==bad way.
  - brobinson 7y ago
    You can easily cause a C/Go program to crash/abort due to runtime type errors. If you've written C, you've miscast something at some point. Go in particular relies extremely heavily on runtime reflection. Both languages have poor type systems. Go's race detector is useful and we've caught bugs using it, but it's nicer when the compiler prevents you from having those bugs in the first place. >quite good concurrency primitives That's gonna be a "yikes" from me, dog: https://www.jtolio.com/2016/03/go-channels-are-bad-and-you-should-feel-bad/ https://www.jtolio.com/2016/03/go-channels-are-bad-and-you-s... I'm not a Rust fanboy, I simply like languages where it's more difficult to represent invalid state (Haskell, Ocaml, Rust, etc.) than in the mainstream languages I suffer with in my job on a daily basis. Rust happens to have great tooling and is the most likely to make inroads on these issues I care about (runtime stability + code correctness via good type system).
    - weberc2 7y ago
      Go doesn’t rely heavily on runtime reflection. Putting it in the same category as C or JS is disingenuous. Rust has a great static type system, but I’ve never seen a Go program fail on a runtime/reflection type error before.
      - 7y ago

h91wka 7y ago

Sorry, but by and large that's "red goes faster" type of reasoning.

jaxwerk 7y ago
Red is a property of a car totally unrelated to its performance characteristics. The language software is implemented in absolutely has an impact on the performance and behavior of the software. This is more like "Carbon is faster than aluminum." Yeah, it's a generalization, but it's a useful one.
cgag 7y ago
I don't know what you people get out of pretending you can't derive much from being told what language something is written in.

michaelcampbell 7y ago

At least it's not Rust-this or that-4-Rust. The bundling of the language in the title of the app is a fad I hope I see the end of. Yes, Python, we get that you wrote WhateverPy in Python.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
staticassertion 7y ago
This, for me, is due to lack of package namespacing in these languages. Someone took 'xyz' ? Well I guess I'm going to be 'xyz-rs'
weberc2 7y ago
Rust has its own -rs thing going on.
- CameronNemo 7y ago
  Mostly for bindings though.
  - weberc2 7y ago
    Ah, that would make sense. I’ll have to take your word for it.

ludjer 7y ago

where is Java in the list :D

brobinson 7y ago

For me, I primarily think about stability: Python/Go/JS/C -> runtime crashes due to type errors and/or data races Rust -> no runtime crashes due to type errors/data races

makapuf 7y ago
Why would go and c which have static typing suffer from type errors ? Why would go that has a data race checker and quite good concurrency primitives be more prone that rust ? Rust seems to have its merits but I find the parent post more level headed in that it tries to characterize language runtime, admittedly subjectively but not in a rust==good, rest==bad way.
- brobinson 7y ago
  You can easily cause a C/Go program to crash/abort due to runtime type errors. If you've written C, you've miscast something at some point. Go in particular relies extremely heavily on runtime reflection. Both languages have poor type systems. Go's race detector is useful and we've caught bugs using it, but it's nicer when the compiler prevents you from having those bugs in the first place. >quite good concurrency primitives That's gonna be a "yikes" from me, dog: https://www.jtolio.com/2016/03/go-channels-are-bad-and-you-should-feel-bad/ https://www.jtolio.com/2016/03/go-channels-are-bad-and-you-s... I'm not a Rust fanboy, I simply like languages where it's more difficult to represent invalid state (Haskell, Ocaml, Rust, etc.) than in the mainstream languages I suffer with in my job on a daily basis. Rust happens to have great tooling and is the most likely to make inroads on these issues I care about (runtime stability + code correctness via good type system).
  - weberc2 7y ago
    Go doesn’t rely heavily on runtime reflection. Putting it in the same category as C or JS is disingenuous. Rust has a great static type system, but I’ve never seen a Go program fail on a runtime/reflection type error before.
    - 7y ago