4 ms·

And a lot of the C++ (and Hack (no pun) and Python) in the Meta codebase is being gradually displaced by Rust because safe with zero-cost abstraction performanc

And a lot of the C++ (and Hack (no pun) and Python) in the Meta codebase is being gradually displaced by Rust because safe with zero-cost abstraction performance is (almost) magic. Of MAANG, only Netflix and Apple are still missing from the Rust Foundation. The future is Rusty.

KaiserPro 4y ago
> displaced by Rust because safe with zero-cost abstraction performance is (almost) magic. no, its because about 1000 people wanted to learn a new language instead of fixing bugs in the present code. look, dont get me wrong, rust is grand. however blindly re-creating everything in rust, and leaving everything else to rot isn't the answer.
- jchw 4y ago
  Pretty sure even just the folks at MANGA alone that use Rust outnumber the 1,000 figure by this point. Anyways, most bugs actually result from changes in code, so it makes sense to focus future improvements on a more robust greenfield codebase. You can fix bugs in C++, but if you want to prevent them from being introduced, you are going to need a bigger hammer.
  - TeMPOraL 4y ago
    >>> MAANG > MANGA Reading mentions of big tech on HN is always a Mugato, Gumato moment for me, with every comment using a different acronym to refer to these companies. What's the status of Rust in the greater AGAM(EMNO)N?
    - Scoundreller 4y ago
      I liked how French newspapers would refer to Facebook, Amazon, Apple and Google as FAAG companies. (It took a little longer for Netflix to catch on there due to entrenched piracy and poorer selection, if it ever really did).
- Hermitian909 4y ago
  Speaking from inside a big company, Rust lowers the risk profile for many projects and thus makes them easier to get approved from a business standpoint.
  - KaiserPro 4y ago
    I mean thats mostly posthock justification. (speaking from a tech giant) The business cares about the following (in order): o does it do what it's supposed to do? o does it make the $thing quicker/cheaper/more efficient? o is it reliable for the end user? Everything else is supplementary. Even, in most cases security. look, Its great that people are happy about a language. But its just a brush for logic. Yes, rust is better than C++ for most things. But, and I cannot emphasise this enough, it is not the new messiah. Its not going to magically make that badly run project run better. Its not going to solve the structural problems that your current project has.
    - SubjectToChange 4y ago
      But its just a brush for logic. Yes, rust is better than C++ for most things. Don't you see how ironic it is to write those statements back-to-back? But, and I cannot emphasise this enough, it is not the new messiah. Its not going to magically make that badly run project run better. This is a pretty basic fact, in fact you might as well emphasize the importance of clean drinking water while you're at it. Yes, Flon's Axiom remains as true today as it was in 1975. Its not going to solve the structural problems that your current project has. Again, reasonable people do not expect Rust to magically fix their problems. Rather those people see languages like Rust as giving them the necessary tools to fix their problems. Hence why they are willing to put in the extra effort for learning and using Rust.
      - KaiserPro 4y ago
        > Don't you see how ironic it is to write those statements back-to-back? Ironic? not really. I'm not doubting that rust is an improvement. > reasonable people do not expect Rust to magically fix their problems. alas, in the massive mono repo where I work, this is not the case. What I'm doubting is the effort currently being expended telling me that rust is superior and will solve all of $project's problems with one simple quick re-write. I'm too fucking old for this naive carbonfibre/innovation token sucking evangelism. rust is fun, great! rust is memory safe, brilliant! Rust is fast, super! now fix the fucking bugs in your existing code, don't make me wait for a failed re-write to not deliver the features we need. problem: "our CLI tools are fragmented, incoherent and badly documented" solution: "we are now re-writing everything in rust! its so much faster"

KaiserPro 4y ago

> displaced by Rust because safe with zero-cost abstraction performance is (almost) magic. no, its because about 1000 people wanted to learn a new language instead of fixing bugs in the present code. look, dont get me wrong, rust is grand. however blindly re-creating everything in rust, and leaving everything else to rot isn't the answer.

jchw 4y ago
Pretty sure even just the folks at MANGA alone that use Rust outnumber the 1,000 figure by this point. Anyways, most bugs actually result from changes in code, so it makes sense to focus future improvements on a more robust greenfield codebase. You can fix bugs in C++, but if you want to prevent them from being introduced, you are going to need a bigger hammer.
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  >>> MAANG > MANGA Reading mentions of big tech on HN is always a Mugato, Gumato moment for me, with every comment using a different acronym to refer to these companies. What's the status of Rust in the greater AGAM(EMNO)N?
  - Scoundreller 4y ago
    I liked how French newspapers would refer to Facebook, Amazon, Apple and Google as FAAG companies. (It took a little longer for Netflix to catch on there due to entrenched piracy and poorer selection, if it ever really did).
Hermitian909 4y ago
Speaking from inside a big company, Rust lowers the risk profile for many projects and thus makes them easier to get approved from a business standpoint.
- KaiserPro 4y ago
  I mean thats mostly posthock justification. (speaking from a tech giant) The business cares about the following (in order): o does it do what it's supposed to do? o does it make the $thing quicker/cheaper/more efficient? o is it reliable for the end user? Everything else is supplementary. Even, in most cases security. look, Its great that people are happy about a language. But its just a brush for logic. Yes, rust is better than C++ for most things. But, and I cannot emphasise this enough, it is not the new messiah. Its not going to magically make that badly run project run better. Its not going to solve the structural problems that your current project has.
  - SubjectToChange 4y ago
    But its just a brush for logic. Yes, rust is better than C++ for most things. Don't you see how ironic it is to write those statements back-to-back? But, and I cannot emphasise this enough, it is not the new messiah. Its not going to magically make that badly run project run better. This is a pretty basic fact, in fact you might as well emphasize the importance of clean drinking water while you're at it. Yes, Flon's Axiom remains as true today as it was in 1975. Its not going to solve the structural problems that your current project has. Again, reasonable people do not expect Rust to magically fix their problems. Rather those people see languages like Rust as giving them the necessary tools to fix their problems. Hence why they are willing to put in the extra effort for learning and using Rust.
    - KaiserPro 4y ago
      > Don't you see how ironic it is to write those statements back-to-back? Ironic? not really. I'm not doubting that rust is an improvement. > reasonable people do not expect Rust to magically fix their problems. alas, in the massive mono repo where I work, this is not the case. What I'm doubting is the effort currently being expended telling me that rust is superior and will solve all of $project's problems with one simple quick re-write. I'm too fucking old for this naive carbonfibre/innovation token sucking evangelism. rust is fun, great! rust is memory safe, brilliant! Rust is fast, super! now fix the fucking bugs in your existing code, don't make me wait for a failed re-write to not deliver the features we need. problem: "our CLI tools are fragmented, incoherent and badly documented" solution: "we are now re-writing everything in rust! its so much faster"