3 ms·

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet Praises are generally dismissed when they seem to contradict this

by __s 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet Praises are generally dismissed when they seem to contradict this principle

sylvain_kerkour 6y ago
Never heard about that before but I will dig the matter for sure. That being said I'm sure that rustaceans disagree about the "No Silver Bullet" part (when you can compile to WebAssembly, write HTTP / TCP servers, embedded development and much more).
- Jare 6y ago
  I love Rust, but I'm pretty sure it is not the best language for exploratory programming or quick prototyping.
  - lostcolony 6y ago
    Even excluding network and org effects - For distributed problems I'd prefer something like Elixir. This may even be true for web dev (I admit I haven't explored it as much in Rust; just, a lot of what I've had in web services is IO bound, with strong process isolation expectations, and that's perfect for Elixir) For heavy math, Julia or maybe Python + libs. To build a DSL, a Lisp. For something largely integrative of other libraries, whatever language those libraries are built in. For certain types of problem solving and optimization problems, a logic language like Prolog. Etc.
  - waiseristy 6y ago
    No no no... You're just not using enough Rc<RefCell<>>'s /s
- nicoburns 6y ago
  > I'm sure that rustaceans disagree about the "No Silver Bullet" Rustaceans tend to be a pretty practical bunch, so I'd imagine most of them do agree with it. It was also the one part of your post I didn't agree with (if taken literally)
- akiselev 6y ago
  > That being said I'm sure that rustaceans disagree about the "No Silver Bullet" (when you can compile to WebAssembly, write HTTP / TCP servers, embedded development and much more). I'm certain they don't. For one, Rust can't even be used in a niche but important class of safety/mission critical software until a certain level of certifications (i.e. DO-178C) are reached so by that measure alone it is disqualified. For two, what targets the languages compile to are a necessary but far from sufficient measure of a language's practicality - the most important ones have nothing to do with the language and everything to do with ecosystem and tooling.
blacktriangle 6y ago
I feel like there should be a contradictory meme along the lines of "Don't need 100 wrenches, just a crescent." While it's doubtful there's a single programming language to rule them all, I seriously doubt the panoply of languages we are faced with is the optimal solution. At some point as a developer new languages stop bending your brain in new ways, they just become the same thing with all new baggage to deal with. I can certainly see where a person is legitimately in search of the last language they ever need to learn.
- frenchy 6y ago
  > "Don't need 100 wrenches, just a crescent." Is that contradictory? Non-adjustable wrenches still exist, and are still used on a regular basis. If you do a lot of work on at a single size they're nice because they weigh less, fit in smaller spaces, and you don't have to worry about then getting jostled and changing size on you.
  - blacktriangle 6y ago
    Yeah it's not the best analogy, but I think the rest of the idea still stands. I don't think a person looking at a language and thinking that it could be their silver bullet discredits their analysis, and Rust in particularly does seem well suited for that possibility with it's ability to address both low-level and high level programming.
    - frenchy 6y ago
      Fair point.

by __s 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet Praises are generally dismissed when they seem to contradict this principle

sylvain_kerkour 6y ago

Never heard about that before but I will dig the matter for sure. That being said I'm sure that rustaceans disagree about the "No Silver Bullet" part (when you can compile to WebAssembly, write HTTP / TCP servers, embedded development and much more).

Jare 6y ago
I love Rust, but I'm pretty sure it is not the best language for exploratory programming or quick prototyping.
- lostcolony 6y ago
  Even excluding network and org effects - For distributed problems I'd prefer something like Elixir. This may even be true for web dev (I admit I haven't explored it as much in Rust; just, a lot of what I've had in web services is IO bound, with strong process isolation expectations, and that's perfect for Elixir) For heavy math, Julia or maybe Python + libs. To build a DSL, a Lisp. For something largely integrative of other libraries, whatever language those libraries are built in. For certain types of problem solving and optimization problems, a logic language like Prolog. Etc.
- waiseristy 6y ago
  No no no... You're just not using enough Rc<RefCell<>>'s /s
nicoburns 6y ago
> I'm sure that rustaceans disagree about the "No Silver Bullet" Rustaceans tend to be a pretty practical bunch, so I'd imagine most of them do agree with it. It was also the one part of your post I didn't agree with (if taken literally)
akiselev 6y ago
> That being said I'm sure that rustaceans disagree about the "No Silver Bullet" (when you can compile to WebAssembly, write HTTP / TCP servers, embedded development and much more). I'm certain they don't. For one, Rust can't even be used in a niche but important class of safety/mission critical software until a certain level of certifications (i.e. DO-178C) are reached so by that measure alone it is disqualified. For two, what targets the languages compile to are a necessary but far from sufficient measure of a language's practicality - the most important ones have nothing to do with the language and everything to do with ecosystem and tooling.

blacktriangle 6y ago

I feel like there should be a contradictory meme along the lines of "Don't need 100 wrenches, just a crescent." While it's doubtful there's a single programming language to rule them all, I seriously doubt the panoply of languages we are faced with is the optimal solution. At some point as a developer new languages stop bending your brain in new ways, they just become the same thing with all new baggage to deal with. I can certainly see where a person is legitimately in search of the last language they ever need to learn.

frenchy 6y ago
> "Don't need 100 wrenches, just a crescent." Is that contradictory? Non-adjustable wrenches still exist, and are still used on a regular basis. If you do a lot of work on at a single size they're nice because they weigh less, fit in smaller spaces, and you don't have to worry about then getting jostled and changing size on you.
- blacktriangle 6y ago
  Yeah it's not the best analogy, but I think the rest of the idea still stands. I don't think a person looking at a language and thinking that it could be their silver bullet discredits their analysis, and Rust in particularly does seem well suited for that possibility with it's ability to address both low-level and high level programming.
  - frenchy 6y ago
    Fair point.