4 ms·

As someone who's not the biggest fan of Rust because of its complexity. There is a big reason to use it today. If you need to use something that has safety guar

As someone who's not the biggest fan of Rust because of its complexity. There is a big reason to use it today. If you need to use something that has safety guarantees where it's possible to achieve acceptable performance in certain classes of programs where languages like golang, nim or crystal have trouble achieving then I just don't see any other options out there certainly not one with as many libraries available as rust. Maybe I can use a combination like c and lua to get the right trade offs between safety and performance in the necessary parts of my program but I'm not that confident that I can reach either safety or acceptable performance doing that. Maybe, I could use C and some kind of static analyzer to find all of my memory bugs. Again, I'm not confident I would succeed there. I might also need a fuzzer to do it. At this point I'm trading a complicated language for a easy fast language with extra complicated operations that may or may not give me the outcome of memory safety.

selfmodruntime 4y ago
What are the major points concerning complexity you have encountered?
- bobajeff 4y ago
  Language features. There are many features and language patterns, paradigms which I need to get used to in order to use libraries and read others code. (Similar to C++) I can't even begin to understand macros. So far it doesn't seem to be insurmountable but it's definitely not what I'd call simple.
Existenceblinks 4y ago
Yeah even if I'm a big fan of ML family lang, complexity to solve memory safety is too much to the point Zig is more appealing in way that helps you do it yourself more easily.
- bobajeff 4y ago
  Oh, I forgot about Zig. I haven't had a chance to really check it out yet. As far as memory safety do you think it would be a good idea to write something like say a http server or client in Zig?
valenterry 4y ago
You can choose between 1) your programming language being complex or 2) your codebase being huge, repetitive and boilerplaty. I know what I'll choose any day.
UltraViolence 4y ago
IMHO the biggest reason for Rust is that developers NEVER get enough time to write perfect code. All this takes time and management usually doesn't grant you that allowance. In a perfect world where developers could tinker with the code until it's perfect we wouldn't need Rust. This is not that world.
- valenterry 4y ago
  Not even that. Because if your language isn't expressive enough, you can't make code perfect. Or rather, "perfect" in one language is than worse than "good" in another language. Imagine big but perfect Assembly codebase against an okay-ish Rust codebase. Which one would you prefer to maintain?

selfmodruntime 4y ago

What are the major points concerning complexity you have encountered?

bobajeff 4y ago
Language features. There are many features and language patterns, paradigms which I need to get used to in order to use libraries and read others code. (Similar to C++) I can't even begin to understand macros. So far it doesn't seem to be insurmountable but it's definitely not what I'd call simple.

Existenceblinks 4y ago

Yeah even if I'm a big fan of ML family lang, complexity to solve memory safety is too much to the point Zig is more appealing in way that helps you do it yourself more easily.

bobajeff 4y ago
Oh, I forgot about Zig. I haven't had a chance to really check it out yet. As far as memory safety do you think it would be a good idea to write something like say a http server or client in Zig?

valenterry 4y ago

You can choose between 1) your programming language being complex or 2) your codebase being huge, repetitive and boilerplaty. I know what I'll choose any day.

UltraViolence 4y ago

IMHO the biggest reason for Rust is that developers NEVER get enough time to write perfect code. All this takes time and management usually doesn't grant you that allowance. In a perfect world where developers could tinker with the code until it's perfect we wouldn't need Rust. This is not that world.

valenterry 4y ago
Not even that. Because if your language isn't expressive enough, you can't make code perfect. Or rather, "perfect" in one language is than worse than "good" in another language. Imagine big but perfect Assembly codebase against an okay-ish Rust codebase. Which one would you prefer to maintain?