3 ms·

> Many times over i've ran into issues in go where something deep down in a library returns a nil on a pointer and my crap blows up in unexpected ways. Doesn't

> Many times over i've ran into issues in go where something deep down in a library returns a nil on a pointer and my crap blows up in unexpected ways. Doesn't that mean precisely that Rust is easier than Go? Finding those bugs must be a nightmare, not to mention the impact of them happening in the first place, in prod... Usually people say X is easier than rust because writing a program in X is easier than writing a program in Rust. When in fact they should be comparing (writing a program + debugging) in X vs (writing a program + debugging) in Rust

omginternets 3y ago
>Doesn't that mean precisely that Rust is easier than Go? I suppose that boils down to whether you find it easier to wrangle Rust-isms or track down runtime bugs/panics. In many cases, I'd rather wrangle Rust-isms. In some cases (and they're not rare), I'd rather wrangle Go's runtime errors. What makes some Rust people insufferable (not you, friend!) is that they think everything is about the language and toolchain, and they lose sight of the tremendous relevance of the application. There's a reason not everybody is switching to Rust, and it's not because they're ignorant or stupid.
riwsky 3y ago
Or maybe… certain problems lend themselves better to some languages than others, even when accounting for debugging, and Rust just isn’t the winner every time?
corethree 3y ago
From an anecdotal standpoint, having used both. Go is easier then rust in aggregate. This of course is just based off of feeling as there's no quantitative metric able to aggregate each dimension into a single number. This is 100% accounting for program + debugging. The anecdotal reason for this is because the human brain finds it easier to debug golang bugs then it does to write and completely understand all the semantics of rust. This is the same thing as why python is easier then C++ EVEN though counter-intuitively C++ has strict type checking and python doesn't. Rust in my mind is ultimately better than C++ but it unfortunately, like C++, it retains a level a complexity past a certain reasonable level that prevents it from hitting ubiquity. Thus it's not the answer. There will be in the future some language out there that will be just as flexible/safe and less complex.

omginternets 3y ago

>Doesn't that mean precisely that Rust is easier than Go? I suppose that boils down to whether you find it easier to wrangle Rust-isms or track down runtime bugs/panics. In many cases, I'd rather wrangle Rust-isms. In some cases (and they're not rare), I'd rather wrangle Go's runtime errors. What makes some Rust people insufferable (not you, friend!) is that they think everything is about the language and toolchain, and they lose sight of the tremendous relevance of the application. There's a reason not everybody is switching to Rust, and it's not because they're ignorant or stupid.

riwsky 3y ago

Or maybe… certain problems lend themselves better to some languages than others, even when accounting for debugging, and Rust just isn’t the winner every time?

corethree 3y ago

From an anecdotal standpoint, having used both. Go is easier then rust in aggregate. This of course is just based off of feeling as there's no quantitative metric able to aggregate each dimension into a single number. This is 100% accounting for program + debugging. The anecdotal reason for this is because the human brain finds it easier to debug golang bugs then it does to write and completely understand all the semantics of rust. This is the same thing as why python is easier then C++ EVEN though counter-intuitively C++ has strict type checking and python doesn't. Rust in my mind is ultimately better than C++ but it unfortunately, like C++, it retains a level a complexity past a certain reasonable level that prevents it from hitting ubiquity. Thus it's not the answer. There will be in the future some language out there that will be just as flexible/safe and less complex.