5 ms·

The more I see these kind of articles the more I am convinced that Rust is the future. Coming from a non technical background and being a python developer I wan

by zuj 5y ago

The more I see these kind of articles the more I am convinced that Rust is the future. Coming from a non technical background and being a python developer I wanted to learn rust but struggling to get comfortable with it. The main reason being I am not in a position to write anything practical with it apart form going through the book and reading tutorials. Gotta put more wood behind this one. I hate to speculate but most of the modern stack will be Rust, python and JS ?

fileeditview 5y ago
No.. there is no "language x is the future". There are many languages for many purposes. Learn multiple, see what differentiates them. All of this hype needs to end.. seriously. Terms like "modern stack" should be forbidden. This all reflects in job descriptions. They just mention a ton of buzz tech, no matter if they actually use it, if you would actually use it in the job. No description of what you will actually do. This focus on the tech stack is superficial.
- zuj 5y ago
  I agree with you. Sometimes it's just so hard not to use the tech buzz words.
CraigJPerry 5y ago
There’s an idea that you should work in the highest level language you can get away with for the task at hand. E.g. if you were writing a device driver, you might try to choose c over asm wherever you can. If you were writing an enterprise app, you might choose java over c++. Etc etc The idea is that you don’t want to give up productivity boosters like garbage collection unless you’re forced to. But it’s just an idea and not everyone buys into it. Otherwise we’d all be writing in the ultimate programming language (lisp).
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  > Otherwise we’d all be writing in the ultimate programming language (lisp). I like Lisp, but I'd argue that languages like Python and Ruby are higher level. Also easier to read.
  - CraigJPerry 5y ago
    Yeah i think i have to agree with easier to read - although now that i'm used to lisp syntax, it's less clear cut than it used to be for me. I really like lisp when it's written in an immutable style, it becomes really easy to divide and conquer a code base to understand only the bit you care about editing - but it's not an absolute thing, i still have reservations about macros even though i've personally not yet been bitten. Higher level - i think that has to go to lisp and it's because of macros. You can write your own programming language, lisp is more like a toolkit for creating the ideal language for solving your problem in that regard.
    - Mikeb85 5y ago
      I mean, I don't find Lisp hard to read, the parens disappear in my mind and it looks almost like Python-esque white-spaced code if you space things correctly albeit with weird function names. But it is at a lower level than Ruby/Python if you don't use macros, to make it "higher level" you use macros, but at that point you're in DSL territory, you can always just add more abstractions to any language really and write DSLs in plenty of languages (something like Rails which uses a bunch of metaprogramming could almost be called a DSL). Lisp IMO is in a strange spot where idiomatic enterprise-y Common Lisp is between Java and Ruby/Python, Lisp + Macros or something like Clojure is higher level. I think Ruby/Python are winning almost just because of their usage of readable and common sense English words.
- zuj 5y ago
  That's an interesting take. Reminded me of this https://twitter.com/brettsky/status/1455600734813052930?s=20 https://twitter.com/brettsky/status/1455600734813052930?s=20
  - CraigJPerry 5y ago
    I think python is probably the more pragmatic choice of ultimate programming language - certainly easier to hire python talent than lisp talent. I agree with all 4 of those points in that tweet. You can do some pretty twisted things from the comfort of python, e.g. years ago i was able to create an LD PRELOADable shim in python: https://github.com/CraigJPerry/pyshim https://github.com/CraigJPerry/pyshim

by zuj 5y ago

fileeditview 5y ago

No.. there is no "language x is the future". There are many languages for many purposes. Learn multiple, see what differentiates them. All of this hype needs to end.. seriously. Terms like "modern stack" should be forbidden. This all reflects in job descriptions. They just mention a ton of buzz tech, no matter if they actually use it, if you would actually use it in the job. No description of what you will actually do. This focus on the tech stack is superficial.

zuj 5y ago
I agree with you. Sometimes it's just so hard not to use the tech buzz words.

CraigJPerry 5y ago

There’s an idea that you should work in the highest level language you can get away with for the task at hand. E.g. if you were writing a device driver, you might try to choose c over asm wherever you can. If you were writing an enterprise app, you might choose java over c++. Etc etc The idea is that you don’t want to give up productivity boosters like garbage collection unless you’re forced to. But it’s just an idea and not everyone buys into it. Otherwise we’d all be writing in the ultimate programming language (lisp).

Mikeb85 5y ago
> Otherwise we’d all be writing in the ultimate programming language (lisp). I like Lisp, but I'd argue that languages like Python and Ruby are higher level. Also easier to read.
- CraigJPerry 5y ago
  Yeah i think i have to agree with easier to read - although now that i'm used to lisp syntax, it's less clear cut than it used to be for me. I really like lisp when it's written in an immutable style, it becomes really easy to divide and conquer a code base to understand only the bit you care about editing - but it's not an absolute thing, i still have reservations about macros even though i've personally not yet been bitten. Higher level - i think that has to go to lisp and it's because of macros. You can write your own programming language, lisp is more like a toolkit for creating the ideal language for solving your problem in that regard.
  - Mikeb85 5y ago
    I mean, I don't find Lisp hard to read, the parens disappear in my mind and it looks almost like Python-esque white-spaced code if you space things correctly albeit with weird function names. But it is at a lower level than Ruby/Python if you don't use macros, to make it "higher level" you use macros, but at that point you're in DSL territory, you can always just add more abstractions to any language really and write DSLs in plenty of languages (something like Rails which uses a bunch of metaprogramming could almost be called a DSL). Lisp IMO is in a strange spot where idiomatic enterprise-y Common Lisp is between Java and Ruby/Python, Lisp + Macros or something like Clojure is higher level. I think Ruby/Python are winning almost just because of their usage of readable and common sense English words.
zuj 5y ago
That's an interesting take. Reminded me of this https://twitter.com/brettsky/status/1455600734813052930?s=20 https://twitter.com/brettsky/status/1455600734813052930?s=20
- CraigJPerry 5y ago
  I think python is probably the more pragmatic choice of ultimate programming language - certainly easier to hire python talent than lisp talent. I agree with all 4 of those points in that tweet. You can do some pretty twisted things from the comfort of python, e.g. years ago i was able to create an LD PRELOADable shim in python: https://github.com/CraigJPerry/pyshim https://github.com/CraigJPerry/pyshim