4 ms·

It's still bizarre though that Rust is capturing such ridiculous mindshare. I suspect it has a lot to do with web developers being plugged into Mozilla, and Moz

It's still bizarre though that Rust is capturing such ridiculous mindshare. I suspect it has a lot to do with web developers being plugged into Mozilla, and Mozilla spending quite a lot on Rust development and marketing. And Zig may be being roped into it. It seems to be a temporary low-level programming zeitgeist driven by YouTube and Reddit recommendation algorithms to an audience that has never done it and probably never will.

j-james 4y ago
While I love Nim, another reason for Rust's success (aside from its type system, general good language design, and zero-cost memory safety) is that the tooling is ridiculously good, probably the best of any language I've used, sans maybe Java. Nim's tooling is improving but still has a ways to go - I still occasionally get orphaned langserver processes, and while the langserver itself is pretty good, it's nowhere near the level of what rust-analyzer can do. Especially with error messages and (automatic) refactoring.
wyldfire 4y ago
> It's still bizarre though that Rust is capturing such ridiculous mindshare. I don't think it's that bizarre. The two big headline features that bring Rust such popularity are: #1 "70% of bugs are memory-safety bugs" [1] and Rust can help solve those, and #2 C/C++ have a couple of package manager solutions - none of which have critical mass and Rust "comes with" cargo. Those two make me really eager to continue experimenting with Rust. > It seems to be a temporary low-level programming zeitgeist driven by YouTube and Reddit recommendation algorithms to an audience that has never done it and probably never will. This is some weird gatekeep-y kinda thing. Most of us didn't start out with low-level programming. Wouldn't it have been odd and frustrating for someone to tell your younger self that you have "never written C and probably never will"? [1] https://github.com/microsoft/MSRC-Security-Research https://github.com/microsoft/MSRC-Security-Research
- netbioserror 4y ago
  > This is some weird gatekeep-y kinda thing. Most of us didn't start out with low-level programming. Wouldn't it have been odd and frustrating for someone to tell your younger self that you have "never written C and probably never will"? I'm not making any sorts of demands about who should be able to program at a low level, but I'm being realistic about who will. I have an intuition that I do not think is unreasonable that the vast majority of the 20- to 30-something crowd that recently learned JavaScript in a boot camp would bounce off of systems programming hard, while a handful might discover it's what they should've been doing all along. The young are not who I'm thinking of at all. Someone with time and neuroplasticity can and should be spending that time toying around with C, Haskell, and Lisp to expand their understanding as much as possible.
  - Tarq0n 4y ago
    People bounce off of systems programming because C/C++ is hard. Rust's focus on ergonomics, error management, tooling and learning resources actually makes people want to try again.
- gpderetta 4y ago
  > 70% of bugs are memory-safety bugs 70% of security bugs. Approximately 0% of bugs that I had to deal in my career are memory-safety bugs. That doesn't mean it is not important to fix or avoid security bugs (it indeed is!), but you have to be clear what you are selling.
kaba0 4y ago
Rust is the first low-level language that actually solves a fundamental problem of low-level programming. I don’t see why is it surprising that it gains weight. Zig, while I appreciate many of its design goals and definitely has some novel ideas, is “just” a better C.
- netbioserror 4y ago
  I think your comment can actually help me clarify what I meant. My perception is that there is a rift between what domains Rust is targeting versus what audience is actually hyped about Rust. When I look to the C++ world and the embedded/realtime systems industry, what I see is lots of discussion about Carbon and herb Sutter's CppFront. I don't see as much Rust discussion. When I look to the JavaScript/webdev/fullstack world, that is who I see discussing Rust; these are domains where GC languages, even those with lots of GC churn like Clojure, have already proven their utility. In the creator sphere, the same folks talking about JS frameworks are the ones covering Rust and, to a lesser extent, Zig. As usual, the C world seems completely disinterested towards what is outside of it.
  - nindalf 4y ago
    Rust solves a problem for people who only know GC languages - performance. They see their developer tools rewritten in Rust to great success. Examples include ruff for Python, turborepo and turbo build for JS. These tools are worth adopting because they're much faster than what came before them. Therefore Rust is worth learning to build things where performance matters. For C and C++ developers, the value prop isn't so clearly defined. Sure it's possible that Rust code they write might have fewer bugs. But if they think they're the sort of developer that doesn't write bugs, then what does Rust do for them? Just slows them down. I won't get into whether they're right or wrong to feel the way they do. There's also an element of the former group being more open to learning and adopting new tools. The latter group is more likely to say "if it ain't broke, I don't need to learn a new thing".
    - netbioserror 4y ago
      Part of my purpose with my OP was pointing out that the limiting factor for performance is not GC. When developers are coming from JavaScript and Python, the dominating performance factors are interpreting and dynamic typing. For native-compiled GC languages like Nim, Go, and D, GC only becomes an issue when it interferes with deterministic runtime constraints (RC, bounded GC, and arena allocation fix this), or when the GC is subject to lots of allocations and enormous pressure (which Nim minimizes). Which is why I find it weird that webdevs are hyped about Rust: They're using it in an enormous number of publicly distributed applications where a native-compiled GC language would be a clearly better long-term choice.
shakow 4y ago
That's a very limited perspective. I have worked in HPC, Cryptography and Genetics, and Rust is sailing full speed in all these domains -- which are as remote as may be from WebDev & Mozilla.

j-james 4y ago

While I love Nim, another reason for Rust's success (aside from its type system, general good language design, and zero-cost memory safety) is that the tooling is ridiculously good, probably the best of any language I've used, sans maybe Java. Nim's tooling is improving but still has a ways to go - I still occasionally get orphaned langserver processes, and while the langserver itself is pretty good, it's nowhere near the level of what rust-analyzer can do. Especially with error messages and (automatic) refactoring.

wyldfire 4y ago

> It's still bizarre though that Rust is capturing such ridiculous mindshare. I don't think it's that bizarre. The two big headline features that bring Rust such popularity are: #1 "70% of bugs are memory-safety bugs" [1] and Rust can help solve those, and #2 C/C++ have a couple of package manager solutions - none of which have critical mass and Rust "comes with" cargo. Those two make me really eager to continue experimenting with Rust. > It seems to be a temporary low-level programming zeitgeist driven by YouTube and Reddit recommendation algorithms to an audience that has never done it and probably never will. This is some weird gatekeep-y kinda thing. Most of us didn't start out with low-level programming. Wouldn't it have been odd and frustrating for someone to tell your younger self that you have "never written C and probably never will"? [1] https://github.com/microsoft/MSRC-Security-Research https://github.com/microsoft/MSRC-Security-Research

netbioserror 4y ago
> This is some weird gatekeep-y kinda thing. Most of us didn't start out with low-level programming. Wouldn't it have been odd and frustrating for someone to tell your younger self that you have "never written C and probably never will"? I'm not making any sorts of demands about who should be able to program at a low level, but I'm being realistic about who will. I have an intuition that I do not think is unreasonable that the vast majority of the 20- to 30-something crowd that recently learned JavaScript in a boot camp would bounce off of systems programming hard, while a handful might discover it's what they should've been doing all along. The young are not who I'm thinking of at all. Someone with time and neuroplasticity can and should be spending that time toying around with C, Haskell, and Lisp to expand their understanding as much as possible.
- Tarq0n 4y ago
  People bounce off of systems programming because C/C++ is hard. Rust's focus on ergonomics, error management, tooling and learning resources actually makes people want to try again.
gpderetta 4y ago
> 70% of bugs are memory-safety bugs 70% of security bugs. Approximately 0% of bugs that I had to deal in my career are memory-safety bugs. That doesn't mean it is not important to fix or avoid security bugs (it indeed is!), but you have to be clear what you are selling.

kaba0 4y ago

Rust is the first low-level language that actually solves a fundamental problem of low-level programming. I don’t see why is it surprising that it gains weight. Zig, while I appreciate many of its design goals and definitely has some novel ideas, is “just” a better C.

netbioserror 4y ago
I think your comment can actually help me clarify what I meant. My perception is that there is a rift between what domains Rust is targeting versus what audience is actually hyped about Rust. When I look to the C++ world and the embedded/realtime systems industry, what I see is lots of discussion about Carbon and herb Sutter's CppFront. I don't see as much Rust discussion. When I look to the JavaScript/webdev/fullstack world, that is who I see discussing Rust; these are domains where GC languages, even those with lots of GC churn like Clojure, have already proven their utility. In the creator sphere, the same folks talking about JS frameworks are the ones covering Rust and, to a lesser extent, Zig. As usual, the C world seems completely disinterested towards what is outside of it.
- nindalf 4y ago
  Rust solves a problem for people who only know GC languages - performance. They see their developer tools rewritten in Rust to great success. Examples include ruff for Python, turborepo and turbo build for JS. These tools are worth adopting because they're much faster than what came before them. Therefore Rust is worth learning to build things where performance matters. For C and C++ developers, the value prop isn't so clearly defined. Sure it's possible that Rust code they write might have fewer bugs. But if they think they're the sort of developer that doesn't write bugs, then what does Rust do for them? Just slows them down. I won't get into whether they're right or wrong to feel the way they do. There's also an element of the former group being more open to learning and adopting new tools. The latter group is more likely to say "if it ain't broke, I don't need to learn a new thing".
  - netbioserror 4y ago
    Part of my purpose with my OP was pointing out that the limiting factor for performance is not GC. When developers are coming from JavaScript and Python, the dominating performance factors are interpreting and dynamic typing. For native-compiled GC languages like Nim, Go, and D, GC only becomes an issue when it interferes with deterministic runtime constraints (RC, bounded GC, and arena allocation fix this), or when the GC is subject to lots of allocations and enormous pressure (which Nim minimizes). Which is why I find it weird that webdevs are hyped about Rust: They're using it in an enormous number of publicly distributed applications where a native-compiled GC language would be a clearly better long-term choice.

shakow 4y ago

That's a very limited perspective. I have worked in HPC, Cryptography and Genetics, and Rust is sailing full speed in all these domains -- which are as remote as may be from WebDev & Mozilla.