5 ms·

“voted the most popular programming language for the seventh consecutive year, with 87% of developers expressing a desire to use it.” And yet where I live, it

“voted the most popular programming language for the seventh consecutive year, with 87% of developers expressing a desire to use it.” And yet where I live, it has extremely minimal adoption. There’s more rust jobs at panel beaters than doing software development. Rust has to fix itself or remain popular but essentially unused.

Ygg2 4y ago
How exactly do you expect language to increase adoption? It's a chicken and egg problem.
- DoingIsLearning 4y ago
  Python grew organically. People will use whatever addresses their pains or allows them to solve their problems. More often than not the _perceived_ problem is not performance or memory safety.
  - the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
    > Python grew organically. As opposed to Rust?
    - DoingIsLearning 4y ago
      Rust has a huge online community but has not (yet) had a massive industry adoption. GP was asking how that can be achieved.
      - Ygg2 4y ago
        I think that boils down to: A) Get lucky. B) Be the only choice. C) Get a massive corporation to back you. Otherwise you can't ride the network effect to the fullest.
      - the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
        Which is what I would call "organic growth". The exactly same thing happened with Python originally too. It took a very long time for Python to show up in "the industry" and in many ways it never did because it only shows up in certain parts of it.
        DoingIsLearning 4y ago
        Fair perhaps indeed it really is a matter of time.
      - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
        > but has not (yet) had a massive industry adoption Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Dropbox, Cloudflare, Meta. This is a list of companies I could think of quickly, that don't just "use Rust" they are "heavily invested in Rust". If this isn't "massive industry adoption", its not clear what is.
        Ygg2 4y ago
        Well it's not to same level as Java, at least that's how I understand.
hgomersall 4y ago
Fix itself? What would that even look like? We use Rust extensively and haven't regretted it for a moment. If other companies can't see the competitive advantage it offers us, too bad for them.
wongarsu 4y ago
Developer desire to use it outpacing industry adoption seems like a sign of a well designed language to me. Developers can switch languages much faster than entire projects or companies can, so having more developers than jobs signals a language that people want to use.
- dividedbyzero 4y ago
  Their reasons to want to use it may not be aligned with the interests of businesses (or managers) though.
  - galangalalgol 4y ago
    Businesses still view security issues as a cost center. Developers like it because it lets us worry less about the easier mistakes that we all sometimes make and focus more on the deep logical errors that can lead to the same problems.
allo37 4y ago
There has been a desire to use Rust where I work, but it's really hard to make a business case for "Hey, see this C/C++ code that's worked well for years if not decades? Let's rewrite it in a whole new programming language!". I wonder if it's the same story elsewhere?
- biorach 4y ago
  In general rewriting a well functioning, battle tested C/C++ codebase in Rust is probably a bad idea.
  - nindalf 4y ago
    In general rewriting a well functioning, battle tested codebase is probably a bad idea. But sticking to “battle tested” means a local minima at times. For example, there’s no shortage of CVEs in OpenSSL’s past or future. It’s definitely “battle tested”. And yet, that doesn’t mean someone shouldn’t try to write something better.
  - Ygg2 4y ago
    I disagree. Even if Rust wasn't able to eliminate whole swath of errors in C(++). And it is (Nulls and data races). Rust has way better package manager, and actually works on Windows. For example coreutils got rewritten in Rust. And got adopted by Yocto.
    - nickelpro 4y ago
      Cargo is not de facto better than vcpkg. That Rust has a blessed package manager instead of community of competing package managers is a lateral, neither better nor worse.
      - Ygg2 4y ago
        Vcpkg? Never heard of it. 90% of C++ project I saw were using make. Remainder were using cmake. > community of competing package managers is a lateral, neither better nor worse. While I understand your position, that's not my opinion. Having one way to build a package is a blessing. Having had to juggle Python's competitive package manager is a nightmare. https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/python_environment_2x.png https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/python_environment_2x.png Each one has slightly different usages and they are mostly compatible but then you run into edge cases. ----- And lack of blessed libs is something I am strongly against. Rust doesn't have standardized time lib and everyone is suffering for it.
nindalf 4y ago
The article makes a mistake here in interpreting the results of the StackOverflow survey (https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/#technology-most-loved-dreaded-and-wanted https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/#technology-most-loved-...). Here’s the summary with respect to Rust - 9.3% of respondents use Rust (#14) - 87% of respondents who already use Rust would like to continue using Rust. (Most loved) - 17.6% of respondents who don’t already use Rust would like to try out Rust (Most wanted) While I generally agree with the sentiment that Rust can, should and probably will improve I don’t see the survey results or your anecdotal experience as cause for alarm. It’s far from the most popular language (JS 65%) or most popular language without a runtime (C++ 22.5%). But that’s fine because it’s relatively new. The survey indicators a big appetite for trying out Rust among developers who haven’t tried it out already, indicating that the language could continue to grow in popularity.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  It's worth noting that Rust is about the same age as most of the modern C++ paradigms that you see all over C++ codebases these days. C++11 came out at around the same time as the Rust project reached bootstrapping, and C++14 came out less than a year before Rust 1.0. It would not be an exaggeration to say that most of the C++ you use today is about the same age as Rust.
  - nindalf 4y ago
    So even while working with modern C++, only 48% of developers want to continue working with it? And only 7.6% of developers want to learn it?
    - pclmulqdq 4y ago
      Pretty much, and for a few good reasons: - Most C++ projects are not greenfield, and C++ programmers are often working with 10-20 years of cruft in their codebases. - Most of those codebases are also somewhat object-oriented, and thereby tained with "enterprise Javaness." - C++ has a number of high-profile detractors who are well-liked in the programming world, like Linus Torvalds and (in this sphere) Bryan Cantrill. Most of these detractors haven't touched C++ in 15-20 years and are still railing against the monstrosity that was C++03 and the thickness of the C++ spec (without actually using it). - C++ is widely used, and often not in places where it is appropriate or useful. When people use something, they see its rough edges. - C++ isn't "cool" in programming spheres.
MrBuddyCasino 4y ago
The reason it is popular is that the developers who are working with it right now have most likely chosen to do so, as those are greenfield projects. There simply aren't enough old projects written in Rust around to have people be forced to work with them due to sheer market inertia. Companies need people to maintain codebases that were started 20 years ago, this is simply not the case for Rust.
- Jweb_Guru 4y ago
  We've been hearing this theory since Rust was a much smaller percentage of the total responses. With an order of magnitude more developers using the language, you'd expect this high "loved" rating to have slipped considerably, at least behind less commonly used languages, but it hasn't. So I no longer really buy this theory; I think it's centered in the idea that real improvements to programming languages aren't possible, and familiarity / enthusiasm trumps everything.
goodpoint 4y ago
> “voted the most popular programming language for the seventh consecutive year, with 87% of developers expressing a desire to use it.” This only indicates the huge bias in the voting crowd.

Ygg2 4y ago

How exactly do you expect language to increase adoption? It's a chicken and egg problem.

DoingIsLearning 4y ago
Python grew organically. People will use whatever addresses their pains or allows them to solve their problems. More often than not the _perceived_ problem is not performance or memory safety.
- the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
  > Python grew organically. As opposed to Rust?
  - DoingIsLearning 4y ago
    Rust has a huge online community but has not (yet) had a massive industry adoption. GP was asking how that can be achieved.
    - Ygg2 4y ago
      I think that boils down to: A) Get lucky. B) Be the only choice. C) Get a massive corporation to back you. Otherwise you can't ride the network effect to the fullest.
    - the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
      Which is what I would call "organic growth". The exactly same thing happened with Python originally too. It took a very long time for Python to show up in "the industry" and in many ways it never did because it only shows up in certain parts of it.
      - DoingIsLearning 4y ago
        Fair perhaps indeed it really is a matter of time.
    - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
      > but has not (yet) had a massive industry adoption Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Dropbox, Cloudflare, Meta. This is a list of companies I could think of quickly, that don't just "use Rust" they are "heavily invested in Rust". If this isn't "massive industry adoption", its not clear what is.
      - Ygg2 4y ago
        Well it's not to same level as Java, at least that's how I understand.

hgomersall 4y ago

Fix itself? What would that even look like? We use Rust extensively and haven't regretted it for a moment. If other companies can't see the competitive advantage it offers us, too bad for them.

wongarsu 4y ago

Developer desire to use it outpacing industry adoption seems like a sign of a well designed language to me. Developers can switch languages much faster than entire projects or companies can, so having more developers than jobs signals a language that people want to use.

dividedbyzero 4y ago
Their reasons to want to use it may not be aligned with the interests of businesses (or managers) though.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  Businesses still view security issues as a cost center. Developers like it because it lets us worry less about the easier mistakes that we all sometimes make and focus more on the deep logical errors that can lead to the same problems.

allo37 4y ago

There has been a desire to use Rust where I work, but it's really hard to make a business case for "Hey, see this C/C++ code that's worked well for years if not decades? Let's rewrite it in a whole new programming language!". I wonder if it's the same story elsewhere?

biorach 4y ago
In general rewriting a well functioning, battle tested C/C++ codebase in Rust is probably a bad idea.
- nindalf 4y ago
  In general rewriting a well functioning, battle tested codebase is probably a bad idea. But sticking to “battle tested” means a local minima at times. For example, there’s no shortage of CVEs in OpenSSL’s past or future. It’s definitely “battle tested”. And yet, that doesn’t mean someone shouldn’t try to write something better.
- Ygg2 4y ago
  I disagree. Even if Rust wasn't able to eliminate whole swath of errors in C(++). And it is (Nulls and data races). Rust has way better package manager, and actually works on Windows. For example coreutils got rewritten in Rust. And got adopted by Yocto.
  - nickelpro 4y ago
    Cargo is not de facto better than vcpkg. That Rust has a blessed package manager instead of community of competing package managers is a lateral, neither better nor worse.
    - Ygg2 4y ago
      Vcpkg? Never heard of it. 90% of C++ project I saw were using make. Remainder were using cmake. > community of competing package managers is a lateral, neither better nor worse. While I understand your position, that's not my opinion. Having one way to build a package is a blessing. Having had to juggle Python's competitive package manager is a nightmare. https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/python_environment_2x.png https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/python_environment_2x.png Each one has slightly different usages and they are mostly compatible but then you run into edge cases. ----- And lack of blessed libs is something I am strongly against. Rust doesn't have standardized time lib and everyone is suffering for it.

nindalf 4y ago

The article makes a mistake here in interpreting the results of the StackOverflow survey (https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/#technology-most-loved-dreaded-and-wanted https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/#technology-most-loved-...). Here’s the summary with respect to Rust - 9.3% of respondents use Rust (#14) - 87% of respondents who already use Rust would like to continue using Rust. (Most loved) - 17.6% of respondents who don’t already use Rust would like to try out Rust (Most wanted) While I generally agree with the sentiment that Rust can, should and probably will improve I don’t see the survey results or your anecdotal experience as cause for alarm. It’s far from the most popular language (JS 65%) or most popular language without a runtime (C++ 22.5%). But that’s fine because it’s relatively new. The survey indicators a big appetite for trying out Rust among developers who haven’t tried it out already, indicating that the language could continue to grow in popularity.

pclmulqdq 4y ago
It's worth noting that Rust is about the same age as most of the modern C++ paradigms that you see all over C++ codebases these days. C++11 came out at around the same time as the Rust project reached bootstrapping, and C++14 came out less than a year before Rust 1.0. It would not be an exaggeration to say that most of the C++ you use today is about the same age as Rust.
- nindalf 4y ago
  So even while working with modern C++, only 48% of developers want to continue working with it? And only 7.6% of developers want to learn it?
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    Pretty much, and for a few good reasons: - Most C++ projects are not greenfield, and C++ programmers are often working with 10-20 years of cruft in their codebases. - Most of those codebases are also somewhat object-oriented, and thereby tained with "enterprise Javaness." - C++ has a number of high-profile detractors who are well-liked in the programming world, like Linus Torvalds and (in this sphere) Bryan Cantrill. Most of these detractors haven't touched C++ in 15-20 years and are still railing against the monstrosity that was C++03 and the thickness of the C++ spec (without actually using it). - C++ is widely used, and often not in places where it is appropriate or useful. When people use something, they see its rough edges. - C++ isn't "cool" in programming spheres.

MrBuddyCasino 4y ago

The reason it is popular is that the developers who are working with it right now have most likely chosen to do so, as those are greenfield projects. There simply aren't enough old projects written in Rust around to have people be forced to work with them due to sheer market inertia. Companies need people to maintain codebases that were started 20 years ago, this is simply not the case for Rust.

Jweb_Guru 4y ago
We've been hearing this theory since Rust was a much smaller percentage of the total responses. With an order of magnitude more developers using the language, you'd expect this high "loved" rating to have slipped considerably, at least behind less commonly used languages, but it hasn't. So I no longer really buy this theory; I think it's centered in the idea that real improvements to programming languages aren't possible, and familiarity / enthusiasm trumps everything.

goodpoint 4y ago

> “voted the most popular programming language for the seventh consecutive year, with 87% of developers expressing a desire to use it.” This only indicates the huge bias in the voting crowd.