3 ms·

I have the same impression of Rust: great for software that is well scoped/defined and needs to be stable and efficient, not so much for quick iterations (which

by dom96 4y ago

I have the same impression of Rust: great for software that is well scoped/defined and needs to be stable and efficient, not so much for quick iterations (which for startups is important) and software that doesn't need top performance. I think in general that the Rust hype has outgrown what it's good for. If you're writing a web app in Rust then you may want to ask yourself if you're making the right choice.

tcfhgj 4y ago
> If you're writing a web app in Rust then you may want to ask yourself if you're making the right choice. ok, I did ask myself this, still going with Rust there ;-)
jeroenhd 4y ago
For simple applications, Rust is actually pretty easy to work with in my experience. You don't get a lot of comforts other languages provide, but you don't always need those. The performance difference between a Rust server and other languages are incredible, especially in terms of RAM usage and concurrent connections per second. That said, if your program is going to need tons of entities stored in a database, I wouldn't even consider a language or framework without a solid ORM. Rust has some ORM-lite libraries but I'd end up picking a garbage collected language in practice just because of the difficulties that low level programming bring to such middleware. Iterating in Rust isn't that hard as long as you don't try to cheat your way out. Instead of returning null for methods that you haven't implemented, add a todo!, etcetera. You have to do things somewhat right the first time. I think that's good, because there's nothing as permanent as a temporary proof of concept. You can clone/copy your way out of most annoying Rust restrictions at the cost of performance you'd otherwise sacrifice by picking a higher level language anyway. If your startup doesn't know what it's building, you have bigger problems than the language you choose.
- dom96 4y ago
  > The performance difference between a Rust server and other languages are incredible, especially in terms of RAM usage and concurrent connections per second. Really depends on what "other languages" are here. If you're comparing against Python then sure, but if you're comparing against Go then the difference isn't that incredible. > That said, if your program is going to need tons of entities stored in a database, I wouldn't even consider a language or framework without a solid ORM. This is actually what I used Rust for recently and honestly the ORM situation is pretty good. The language itself is just too rigid for this kind of work for too little payoff. > If your startup doesn't know what it's building, you have bigger problems than the language you choose. That's true at a high-level, but iterating on small features/changes fast is what makes or breaks most startups.

by dom96 4y ago

tcfhgj 4y ago

> If you're writing a web app in Rust then you may want to ask yourself if you're making the right choice. ok, I did ask myself this, still going with Rust there ;-)

jeroenhd 4y ago

For simple applications, Rust is actually pretty easy to work with in my experience. You don't get a lot of comforts other languages provide, but you don't always need those. The performance difference between a Rust server and other languages are incredible, especially in terms of RAM usage and concurrent connections per second. That said, if your program is going to need tons of entities stored in a database, I wouldn't even consider a language or framework without a solid ORM. Rust has some ORM-lite libraries but I'd end up picking a garbage collected language in practice just because of the difficulties that low level programming bring to such middleware. Iterating in Rust isn't that hard as long as you don't try to cheat your way out. Instead of returning null for methods that you haven't implemented, add a todo!, etcetera. You have to do things somewhat right the first time. I think that's good, because there's nothing as permanent as a temporary proof of concept. You can clone/copy your way out of most annoying Rust restrictions at the cost of performance you'd otherwise sacrifice by picking a higher level language anyway. If your startup doesn't know what it's building, you have bigger problems than the language you choose.

dom96 4y ago
> The performance difference between a Rust server and other languages are incredible, especially in terms of RAM usage and concurrent connections per second. Really depends on what "other languages" are here. If you're comparing against Python then sure, but if you're comparing against Go then the difference isn't that incredible. > That said, if your program is going to need tons of entities stored in a database, I wouldn't even consider a language or framework without a solid ORM. This is actually what I used Rust for recently and honestly the ORM situation is pretty good. The language itself is just too rigid for this kind of work for too little payoff. > If your startup doesn't know what it's building, you have bigger problems than the language you choose. That's true at a high-level, but iterating on small features/changes fast is what makes or breaks most startups.