4 ms·
A good language amplifies talent - it doesn't require it. If, as you allude to, Rust requires above average talent for producing quality code, I'd say that as a
by bborud 3y ago
A good language amplifies talent - it doesn't require it. If, as you allude to, Rust requires above average talent for producing quality code, I'd say that as a language, it can only make a limited contribution. The only meaningful target audience for a language you hope will see mass adoption is the average programmer.
I don't have sufficient experience with Rust to determine whether or not only a small proportion of programmers will master it. However, if that is indeed correct, it also means that it wouldn't be worth the investment for most of the software industry to switch to Rust. Because mass adoption is, by its very nature, about what average programmers can master.
- kibwen 3y agoRust fundamentally doesn't require any more intelligence than is required to write correct C or C++ code. It actually requires less, because you're offloading the mental labor of memory management onto the compiler. If the assertion is that Rust is unsuitable for the average programmer, then the consequence would be that C and C++ are unsuitable for the average programmer... and yet average programmers have been writing C and C++ for decades. I'm closer to an idiot than I am to a genius, and yet I write Rust all the time. You'll be fine.
- bborud 3y agoI'm fairly certain you are correct.