4 ms·

Its so hard for me to think someone actually thinks this. Rust really is a great programming language that solves a lot of other problems other languages don't

Its so hard for me to think someone actually thinks this. Rust really is a great programming language that solves a lot of other problems other languages don't. It does so by introducing a pretty clever paradigm. The rust community is the least toxic programming community I've ever seen. Leaps and bounds away from go lang, python, and light years away from c, etc. Like use your head, is vba therefore the language which everyone tried and loved and had to move on from? You're trolling yourself lol. Rust is great but yes you have to learn it and yes that is tricky at first. Join a rust chatroom or discussion board and give it a whack.

jstx1 4y ago
I’ve hardly said anything about Rust (and I’m actually learning it at the moment). My point is that stackoverlow’s most loved metric can be misleading. It’s more of a least-wanting-to-jump-ship-right-now metric.
- crabbygrabby 4y ago
  You're not wrong. Being an exdata geek, I can say almost all metrics are flawed. We could even look at the most popular language and realize how that is flawed/not very meaningful too. Thanks for clarifying. Didn't mean to get in your case, but it just didn't sit well with me. I see a lot of people bashing rust in here, who have kind of obviously never tried to learn it.
eternalban 4y ago
> Rust really is a great programming language that solves a lot of other problems other languages don't. It does so by introducing a pretty clever paradigm. Were you around when Scala was the end all be all of programming shiny things? "Early on, Scala rode a wave of hype that frankly surprised even me: hype around pushing syntactic boundaries, hype around reactive architectures, hype around functional programming, hype around the Apache Spark project. Much of that hype has since died down, and there was a period of backlash and negativity both within the Scala community and outside of it. Since then, even the backlash has faded, and what is left is a reasonable, boring language steadily advancing and providing a great platform for general software engineering." source: https://www.lihaoyi.com/post/TheDeathofHypeWhatsNextforScala.html https://www.lihaoyi.com/post/TheDeathofHypeWhatsNextforScala... Not every concern needs to be solved at source level. My brief crit of both Scala and Rust is that they do not take a modular approach and instead have opted for a 'comprehensive' approach that necessarily entails (arguably) unreasonable levels of complexity at syntactic and semantic layers of source code.
- the_only_law 4y ago
  I don’t like Scala, because it seems everyone who makes a library has their own little DLC I have to learn as well.
- crabbygrabby 4y ago
  I appreciate your view on scala and rust. I was around when scala became popular and wrote it in industry for a while. It wasn't a great time. I think rust differs from scala in what it is trying to do. I also think rusts' complexity is backed by functionality that defines it's paradigm. Scala on the other hand has a few too many 'i think this would be nice to support' features in it that make it messy to deal with. Rust imo isn't messy in that regard. Does scala still have it's place, sure. Does rust have it's place, yes. Also if you read the posts on here, there's a lot less hype going for rust than the other way around. It's success isn't really due to it's hype, it's because people like what it does for them. Lots of people hate on it, usually baselessly.
  - dang 4y ago
    Sorry for the offtopicness, but could you please stop creating accounts for every few comments you post? We ban accounts that do that. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix&page=0&query=community%20identity%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
    - crabbygrabby 4y ago
      I was making new accounts for each different topic I posted on. For example I only used this account for this entire topic. I'll stick with crabby grabby. Sorry didn't know.
      - 4y ago
preseinger 4y ago
> Rust really is a great programming language that solves a lot of other problems other languages don't. It does so by introducing a pretty clever paradigm. Rust's "pretty clever paradigm" lifts a large set of low-level concerns into the application domain, and consequently makes them the responsibility of the application programmer. This makes sense for a subset of programming contexts, where the application programmer needs to have and assert specific positions in those domains, in order to produce viable programs. The problem is that, overall, very few programming contexts actually benefit from this level of specificity. An HTTP service implementing a business-level capability absolutely does not give a shit about ownership lifetimes. The fact that Rust "solves" this category of issues is completely irrelevant to this class of program.

jstx1 4y ago

I’ve hardly said anything about Rust (and I’m actually learning it at the moment). My point is that stackoverlow’s most loved metric can be misleading. It’s more of a least-wanting-to-jump-ship-right-now metric.

crabbygrabby 4y ago
You're not wrong. Being an exdata geek, I can say almost all metrics are flawed. We could even look at the most popular language and realize how that is flawed/not very meaningful too. Thanks for clarifying. Didn't mean to get in your case, but it just didn't sit well with me. I see a lot of people bashing rust in here, who have kind of obviously never tried to learn it.

eternalban 4y ago

> Rust really is a great programming language that solves a lot of other problems other languages don't. It does so by introducing a pretty clever paradigm. Were you around when Scala was the end all be all of programming shiny things? "Early on, Scala rode a wave of hype that frankly surprised even me: hype around pushing syntactic boundaries, hype around reactive architectures, hype around functional programming, hype around the Apache Spark project. Much of that hype has since died down, and there was a period of backlash and negativity both within the Scala community and outside of it. Since then, even the backlash has faded, and what is left is a reasonable, boring language steadily advancing and providing a great platform for general software engineering." source: https://www.lihaoyi.com/post/TheDeathofHypeWhatsNextforScala.html https://www.lihaoyi.com/post/TheDeathofHypeWhatsNextforScala... Not every concern needs to be solved at source level. My brief crit of both Scala and Rust is that they do not take a modular approach and instead have opted for a 'comprehensive' approach that necessarily entails (arguably) unreasonable levels of complexity at syntactic and semantic layers of source code.

the_only_law 4y ago
I don’t like Scala, because it seems everyone who makes a library has their own little DLC I have to learn as well.
crabbygrabby 4y ago
I appreciate your view on scala and rust. I was around when scala became popular and wrote it in industry for a while. It wasn't a great time. I think rust differs from scala in what it is trying to do. I also think rusts' complexity is backed by functionality that defines it's paradigm. Scala on the other hand has a few too many 'i think this would be nice to support' features in it that make it messy to deal with. Rust imo isn't messy in that regard. Does scala still have it's place, sure. Does rust have it's place, yes. Also if you read the posts on here, there's a lot less hype going for rust than the other way around. It's success isn't really due to it's hype, it's because people like what it does for them. Lots of people hate on it, usually baselessly.
- dang 4y ago
  Sorry for the offtopicness, but could you please stop creating accounts for every few comments you post? We ban accounts that do that. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix&page=0&query=community%20identity%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
  - crabbygrabby 4y ago
    I was making new accounts for each different topic I posted on. For example I only used this account for this entire topic. I'll stick with crabby grabby. Sorry didn't know.
    - 4y ago

preseinger 4y ago

> Rust really is a great programming language that solves a lot of other problems other languages don't. It does so by introducing a pretty clever paradigm. Rust's "pretty clever paradigm" lifts a large set of low-level concerns into the application domain, and consequently makes them the responsibility of the application programmer. This makes sense for a subset of programming contexts, where the application programmer needs to have and assert specific positions in those domains, in order to produce viable programs. The problem is that, overall, very few programming contexts actually benefit from this level of specificity. An HTTP service implementing a business-level capability absolutely does not give a shit about ownership lifetimes. The fact that Rust "solves" this category of issues is completely irrelevant to this class of program.