6 ms·

Rust market itself as replacement for C/C++ and proclaims as if all code written in C/C++ is garbage and only Rust can solve it, when majority of it's own usefu

Rust market itself as replacement for C/C++ and proclaims as if all code written in C/C++ is garbage and only Rust can solve it, when majority of it's own useful crates heavily rely on unsafe "C/C++" code. So "Pure Rust" is also marketing when you look at the crates used by this software are not Pure Rust, but rely on unsafe code of C underneath. Python, PHP do not claim as C/C++ replacement, indeed Python is synonymous with CPython written in C. In Rust community so far what I noticed is that they try to down-vote anything which shows them that Go language or Swift are more important systems programming language and Rust needs another 10 years to reach to write enough useful software like Go or Swift. Also in Python look at the example of pure python HTTP server Cheroot [1] and check how many PyPI packages it relies on. Also it can run in CPython, PyPy or Jython or any implementation of Python. Rust does not have anything like this yet so using Pure is misleading given it only has one compiler dependent on LLVM (written in C++) to generate target binary. [1] https://github.com/cherrypy/cheroot https://github.com/cherrypy/cheroot

oblio 6y ago
Are you a C programmer threatened by the emergence of a C competitor? I have nothing to gain by "promoting" Rust as I'm not a Rust dev. You have commented a lot in these threads to complain about Rust. If I'm right remember that both your self worth and your employability are ultimately not tied to C. Programmers switching programming languages are not life long miners that have to turn overnight into lawyers. You start building something with Rust and you should be operational quite quickly, most of your skills transfer over.
- amxnagH 6y ago
  Are you a Rust programmer threatened by Mozilla layoffs and critical Rust comments on a message board? A Rust proponent telling people not to tie their self worth to a language. The irony is hilarious.
- dragonsh 6y ago
  > You start building something with Rust and you should be operational quite quickly Rust is anything but easy and simple like Go language. Please try building something like Kubernetes in Rust instead of Go and you will realize “Rust” is a a complicated language (worse than complex). Rust has a steep learning curve and the standard library is quite limited. So you will need to search and choose from different crates to do eve basic work. Eventually one can be productive in it after 2-3 years of development. Compared to it Swift, Go are much easier to pick up as systems programming language and C++ 20 is advanced enough to write safety critical code. There is a reason why large body of systems programming and software for database,network servers is written in Go language not Rust.
  - oblio 6y ago
    Go has much bigger backing that Rust. And most of that server software comes directly from Google or their ecosystem: Kubernetes, Kubernetes appendages, "Cloud Native" stuff. And Swift is only relevant because it's the only modern, officially sanctioned, systems software programming language on 2 platforms: Mac OS and iOS (especially iOS). I know of 0 people who use or have a desire to use it outside of MacOS or iOS. Time will tell, but Microsoft, Amazon, etc. have adopted Rust. And if you look at what they're doing with it, it is generally much lower level than Go or Swift stuff. It's directly in the C/C++ domain.
    - dragonsh 6y ago
      > Time will tell Agree time will tell at present Rust is like other niche systems programming language competing with others like Nim and Zig bit more popular due to Firefox being popular. Nowhere close to Go or Swift, may be in 5 years might have something substantial by Amazon and Microsoft available in open source. > Go has much bigger backing Go is popular because it’s easy, simple, performant with opinionated design and similar to Python controlled heavily by its creator. It gets the job done and it’s syntax can fit in brain, without fighting the language itself. It has very good standard library. It is adopted more outside of Google than inside. Simplicity is easier said than done and Go language did it quite well. It’s like Apple devices and OS beautiful and simple, which works but some just hate it. Rust doesn’t aim to be simple and easy, as it makes people in Rust community feel superior to other programmers by virtue of showing it as complex and difficult. You can see example of this in this thread any comments critical of Rust pointing its shortcomings is downvoted because it’s difficult to digest how the best and safe language for systems programming can have any shortcomings. I don’t mind working in Rust (indeed tried some simple examples and didn’t find any feature special what I can’t do in other languages including safety). I also learned Haskell (which is more complex than Rust) and Lisp (like it more because of its simplicity).
      - the_gipsy 6y ago
        Careful, if you only measure by popularity, you'll get to Java and Javascript as best choice. I'll make a guess and say that these two are not what you want :)
jevgeni 6y ago
C/C++ market itself as replacement for assembly languages and proclaim as if all code written in assembly languages is garbage and only C/C++ can solve it, when majority of it's own useful libraries heavily rely on unsafe assembly code. So "Pure C/C++" is also marketing when you look at the libraries used by this software are not Pure C/C++, but rely on unsafe assembly code underneath. Python, PHP do not claim as assembly replacement, indeed Python is synonymous with CPython which is ultimately written in an assembly language. Also, C/C++ relies on LLVM, which runs on assembly language to generate the target binary.
- dragonsh 6y ago
  > C/C++ market itself as replacement for assembly languages and proclaim as if all code written in assembly languages is garbage and only C/C++ can solve it Your assertion is not true in C/C++ community, but “Rust is good and C or any other systems programming language is bad” is common assertion in Rust community. Most C/C++ programmers will not mind writing handcrafted assembly. Seen plenty of such examples in game and embedded systems development. C/C++ contrary to your arguments make it very easy to incorporate handcrafted assembly along with C/C++ code, haven’t seen handcrafted assembly code in Rust so can’t say if it’s as easy as C.
  - steveklabnik 6y ago
    Rust's inline assembly used to be the exact same as clang's. We recently merged a slightly different version, in the hopes of stabilizing that feature. It ends up pretty similar. (I've been writing a bunch of inline assembly lately, and in fact, ported some C inline asm to Rust. It's not exactly identical, and I did in fact introduce a small bug when doing so...)
    - dragonsh 6y ago
      It’s good Rust adopted C style handcrafted assembly, earlier didn’t expect it given emphasis on safety at any cost as handcrafted assembly is a dual-edged sword it can help with performance and direct access to hardware, but can also introduce bugs. Porting code will have some stumbling blocks, but given enough time and some resources those mountains can be crossed and may uncover new trail and then leave the ropes for other climbers. Personally I am from the camp who likes the simplicity of lisp. That’s one of the reason in spite of learning some Haskell to learn about FP, didn’t continue long although I like Haskell’s brevity as in “Brevity is the soul of wit”. Haskell really makes it easy to refactor the code, but given large surface area makes it hard to learn and develop. Rust felt the same way although recently saw it becoming more approachable and easy. I was pondering recently if built a modern lisp machines, how good it will be. A hardware directly controlled from lisp instead of C.

oblio 6y ago

Are you a C programmer threatened by the emergence of a C competitor? I have nothing to gain by "promoting" Rust as I'm not a Rust dev. You have commented a lot in these threads to complain about Rust. If I'm right remember that both your self worth and your employability are ultimately not tied to C. Programmers switching programming languages are not life long miners that have to turn overnight into lawyers. You start building something with Rust and you should be operational quite quickly, most of your skills transfer over.

amxnagH 6y ago
Are you a Rust programmer threatened by Mozilla layoffs and critical Rust comments on a message board? A Rust proponent telling people not to tie their self worth to a language. The irony is hilarious.
dragonsh 6y ago
> You start building something with Rust and you should be operational quite quickly Rust is anything but easy and simple like Go language. Please try building something like Kubernetes in Rust instead of Go and you will realize “Rust” is a a complicated language (worse than complex). Rust has a steep learning curve and the standard library is quite limited. So you will need to search and choose from different crates to do eve basic work. Eventually one can be productive in it after 2-3 years of development. Compared to it Swift, Go are much easier to pick up as systems programming language and C++ 20 is advanced enough to write safety critical code. There is a reason why large body of systems programming and software for database,network servers is written in Go language not Rust.
- oblio 6y ago
  Go has much bigger backing that Rust. And most of that server software comes directly from Google or their ecosystem: Kubernetes, Kubernetes appendages, "Cloud Native" stuff. And Swift is only relevant because it's the only modern, officially sanctioned, systems software programming language on 2 platforms: Mac OS and iOS (especially iOS). I know of 0 people who use or have a desire to use it outside of MacOS or iOS. Time will tell, but Microsoft, Amazon, etc. have adopted Rust. And if you look at what they're doing with it, it is generally much lower level than Go or Swift stuff. It's directly in the C/C++ domain.
  - dragonsh 6y ago
    > Time will tell Agree time will tell at present Rust is like other niche systems programming language competing with others like Nim and Zig bit more popular due to Firefox being popular. Nowhere close to Go or Swift, may be in 5 years might have something substantial by Amazon and Microsoft available in open source. > Go has much bigger backing Go is popular because it’s easy, simple, performant with opinionated design and similar to Python controlled heavily by its creator. It gets the job done and it’s syntax can fit in brain, without fighting the language itself. It has very good standard library. It is adopted more outside of Google than inside. Simplicity is easier said than done and Go language did it quite well. It’s like Apple devices and OS beautiful and simple, which works but some just hate it. Rust doesn’t aim to be simple and easy, as it makes people in Rust community feel superior to other programmers by virtue of showing it as complex and difficult. You can see example of this in this thread any comments critical of Rust pointing its shortcomings is downvoted because it’s difficult to digest how the best and safe language for systems programming can have any shortcomings. I don’t mind working in Rust (indeed tried some simple examples and didn’t find any feature special what I can’t do in other languages including safety). I also learned Haskell (which is more complex than Rust) and Lisp (like it more because of its simplicity).
    - the_gipsy 6y ago
      Careful, if you only measure by popularity, you'll get to Java and Javascript as best choice. I'll make a guess and say that these two are not what you want :)

jevgeni 6y ago

C/C++ market itself as replacement for assembly languages and proclaim as if all code written in assembly languages is garbage and only C/C++ can solve it, when majority of it's own useful libraries heavily rely on unsafe assembly code. So "Pure C/C++" is also marketing when you look at the libraries used by this software are not Pure C/C++, but rely on unsafe assembly code underneath. Python, PHP do not claim as assembly replacement, indeed Python is synonymous with CPython which is ultimately written in an assembly language. Also, C/C++ relies on LLVM, which runs on assembly language to generate the target binary.

dragonsh 6y ago
> C/C++ market itself as replacement for assembly languages and proclaim as if all code written in assembly languages is garbage and only C/C++ can solve it Your assertion is not true in C/C++ community, but “Rust is good and C or any other systems programming language is bad” is common assertion in Rust community. Most C/C++ programmers will not mind writing handcrafted assembly. Seen plenty of such examples in game and embedded systems development. C/C++ contrary to your arguments make it very easy to incorporate handcrafted assembly along with C/C++ code, haven’t seen handcrafted assembly code in Rust so can’t say if it’s as easy as C.
- steveklabnik 6y ago
  Rust's inline assembly used to be the exact same as clang's. We recently merged a slightly different version, in the hopes of stabilizing that feature. It ends up pretty similar. (I've been writing a bunch of inline assembly lately, and in fact, ported some C inline asm to Rust. It's not exactly identical, and I did in fact introduce a small bug when doing so...)
  - dragonsh 6y ago
    It’s good Rust adopted C style handcrafted assembly, earlier didn’t expect it given emphasis on safety at any cost as handcrafted assembly is a dual-edged sword it can help with performance and direct access to hardware, but can also introduce bugs. Porting code will have some stumbling blocks, but given enough time and some resources those mountains can be crossed and may uncover new trail and then leave the ropes for other climbers. Personally I am from the camp who likes the simplicity of lisp. That’s one of the reason in spite of learning some Haskell to learn about FP, didn’t continue long although I like Haskell’s brevity as in “Brevity is the soul of wit”. Haskell really makes it easy to refactor the code, but given large surface area makes it hard to learn and develop. Rust felt the same way although recently saw it becoming more approachable and easy. I was pondering recently if built a modern lisp machines, how good it will be. A hardware directly controlled from lisp instead of C.