4 ms·
People seem desperate for one language to rule them all. If you don't need a binary, blazing fast multi-threaded speed, and memory safety then you probably don'
by strangescript 6y ago
People seem desperate for one language to rule them all. If you don't need a binary, blazing fast multi-threaded speed, and memory safety then you probably don't need Rust. "Need" being the big thing here. Do you need these things or are they just nice to haves in your head. A scripting language and a web browser can solve a surprising amount of application requirements these days, and its only getting better with time.
- michalhosna 6y agoYes, you need memory safety, everyone needs memory safety. And if you can write program in very fast language, why not? There doesn’t have to be need. Just no reason not to
- Hercuros 6y agoIf you can afford a garbage collector, then you can also just use something like Haskell or OCaml or Python, which also gets you memory safety. No need to think about lifetimes or different types of smart pointers. Not saying that it’s a lot of mental overhead, but it’s definitely a trade-off.
- michalhosna 6y agoAgreed. I am not saying that rust is best for everything. I think, that languages are just tools, and you should use the best tool for the job, there should not be fanboyism in this. The bigger your toolbox the better. I just don't agree with statements about memory safety and speed. The thing is much more complex. I think simply stating "Use the best tool for the job" is much better than showing bad examples. Because everybody needs memory safety and wants speed. Nobody wants to write unsafe slow programs (Well, I HOPE). Nobody wants to drops either of those requirements. When you drop those requirements, it's because of tradeoffs (I think memory safety shouldn't ever be dropped, yes use GC lang if you want to, but in 2020 memory safety should be a very hard requirement)