4 ms·

I believe this is twofold: 1. Unless you abuse Rust horribly, it is both memory-safe and fast (which to me implies a degree of quality, unlike Python which mak

I believe this is twofold: 1. Unless you abuse Rust horribly, it is both memory-safe and fast (which to me implies a degree of quality, unlike Python which makes me more... apprehensive in using tools written in it) 2. Rust is still not a major language but has an enthusiastic community. Rustaceans like the spread the word!

anonzzzies 3y ago
> apprehensive in using tools written in it) Yes. I have that too; mostly due to the very low quality of code ‘hacked’ in the language. It is the (not so) new BASIC and everyone and their sister are launching things in it that should be considered ‘weekend side hacks’ at most, but are announced as the next best thing.
gwd 3y ago
3. Someone who deliberately chooses to use Rust is someone who cares enough about the program being correct to put up with the borrow checker and all that entails. This increases my expectation of the quality of the resulting program. 4. The resulting binary will be a static self-contained compiled binary. This means a) no cluttering up your environment with dependencies b) fast start-up time
- GardenLetter27 3y ago
  Go also does the latter to be fair. If it weren't for Rust, I'd use Go. But Rust's development tools are incredible with rust-analyzer, clippy, etc.
  - gwd 3y ago
    Well yes, and I'm also more likely to install a random golang tool than a random python tool. :-)
  - marcosdumay 3y ago
    The one point on the list that Go doesn't automatically bring is #3. All the others are there. Also 5) it will keep working over time. I know that if it's in Javascript, it will take a while to make it run at all; in Ruby I've spent too long reading your site, it's already incompatible; in Python it will break in a couple of years; and in PHP it will keep doing what it promises, but I'll have to work again and again to keep it only doing what it promises.
fifilura 3y ago
> 1. Unless you abuse Rust horribly, it is both memory-safe and fast The fact that you don't mention computational complexity as the primary concern here tells me that there is something wrong with programming as of 2024. And not necessarily with Rust per se but maybe all the other languages. Why should humans bother with anything else than choosing the right algorithm for the task? And possibly not even that. It should be "combine X with Y such that i get Z" Rhetorical question. I know I open up for many counter arguments, so please choose wisely to keep the discussion alive. And maybe it is just as simple that Rust is the answer to that question?
- DarkNova6 3y ago
  That's fair criticism. I was writing this under the pretense that you get the basics right and don't have needless garbage between you and CPU execution. There's also the fact that Rust tends to draw those who are already proficient with computational knowledge. Whereas the typical Python programmer is just a poor dud that never had any formal education in accessing computer resources.
  - fifilura 3y ago
    So if i loop back to the original message "Written in Rust", what they mean to convey is that "this is done by smart people" ;)
    - DarkNova6 3y ago
      You jest, but if we are talking average it would not be hyperbole. But what I want to add to my last point: Most performance pitfalls I have seen are not due to choosing wrong algorithms, but bad implementations driven by messy implementation and low maintainability. Python and JS are absolutely among the worst of the bunch and weak dynamic typing is a terrible burden to maintain and scale. Mind you, it depends on which domain we are talking about. If you are working close to the metal and you are using something like PyTorch, your performance is indeed determined by choosing the right algorithms and language overhead is less significant in comparison. But most software is just moving things around in memory and do a little networking.

anonzzzies 3y ago

> apprehensive in using tools written in it) Yes. I have that too; mostly due to the very low quality of code ‘hacked’ in the language. It is the (not so) new BASIC and everyone and their sister are launching things in it that should be considered ‘weekend side hacks’ at most, but are announced as the next best thing.

gwd 3y ago

3. Someone who deliberately chooses to use Rust is someone who cares enough about the program being correct to put up with the borrow checker and all that entails. This increases my expectation of the quality of the resulting program. 4. The resulting binary will be a static self-contained compiled binary. This means a) no cluttering up your environment with dependencies b) fast start-up time

GardenLetter27 3y ago
Go also does the latter to be fair. If it weren't for Rust, I'd use Go. But Rust's development tools are incredible with rust-analyzer, clippy, etc.
- gwd 3y ago
  Well yes, and I'm also more likely to install a random golang tool than a random python tool. :-)
- marcosdumay 3y ago
  The one point on the list that Go doesn't automatically bring is #3. All the others are there. Also 5) it will keep working over time. I know that if it's in Javascript, it will take a while to make it run at all; in Ruby I've spent too long reading your site, it's already incompatible; in Python it will break in a couple of years; and in PHP it will keep doing what it promises, but I'll have to work again and again to keep it only doing what it promises.

fifilura 3y ago

> 1. Unless you abuse Rust horribly, it is both memory-safe and fast The fact that you don't mention computational complexity as the primary concern here tells me that there is something wrong with programming as of 2024. And not necessarily with Rust per se but maybe all the other languages. Why should humans bother with anything else than choosing the right algorithm for the task? And possibly not even that. It should be "combine X with Y such that i get Z" Rhetorical question. I know I open up for many counter arguments, so please choose wisely to keep the discussion alive. And maybe it is just as simple that Rust is the answer to that question?

DarkNova6 3y ago
That's fair criticism. I was writing this under the pretense that you get the basics right and don't have needless garbage between you and CPU execution. There's also the fact that Rust tends to draw those who are already proficient with computational knowledge. Whereas the typical Python programmer is just a poor dud that never had any formal education in accessing computer resources.
- fifilura 3y ago
  So if i loop back to the original message "Written in Rust", what they mean to convey is that "this is done by smart people" ;)
  - DarkNova6 3y ago
    You jest, but if we are talking average it would not be hyperbole. But what I want to add to my last point: Most performance pitfalls I have seen are not due to choosing wrong algorithms, but bad implementations driven by messy implementation and low maintainability. Python and JS are absolutely among the worst of the bunch and weak dynamic typing is a terrible burden to maintain and scale. Mind you, it depends on which domain we are talking about. If you are working close to the metal and you are using something like PyTorch, your performance is indeed determined by choosing the right algorithms and language overhead is less significant in comparison. But most software is just moving things around in memory and do a little networking.