4 ms·
I would say most systems are either slower or less correct, yes. The nice thing about being a developer is that these costs are mostly hidden from us. The busin
by jjnoakes 4y ago
I would say most systems are either slower or less correct, yes. The nice thing about being a developer is that these costs are mostly hidden from us. The business pays for more compute if you churn out slow code, and churning out bugs just increases your job security.
Imagine if you had to pay for the performance loss or production bugs directly though...
- fulafel 4y agoFor the rare case where the small speedup is otherwise worth the lower producitivty of Rust, it can still be a worse choice because the you have a disadvantage in iteration speed to rework the code for a faster problem solving strategy / algorithm.
- jjnoakes 4y agoOn the contrary, I find the speedup due to rust to be quite large and the productivity to be quite acceptable. Refactoring for me is so much easier when I can rely on the compiler to catch so much.
- pdimitar 4y agoThe strong and static type system makes refactoring and iteration pace extremely predictable in Rust. And it's often quick to do as well. With dynamic languages you can pretend you're done in an hour and then endure a lot of production bugs. That's not being more productive than Rust. That's playing pretend that a complexity doesn't exist.