4 ms·
> I chest thump because more errors happen at compile time, and fewer at runtime. Why Rust, then? It is not particularly good on this front. Hardly the worst,
by randomdata 2y ago
> I chest thump because more errors happen at compile time, and fewer at runtime.
Why Rust, then? It is not particularly good on this front. Hardly the worst, but is still pretty Mickey Mouse compared to the languages that excel here.
I expect the zealotry/chest thumping is entirely a product of fashion. There are some things about Rust that are truly great, but nobody would go out of their way to mention it if it wasn't what is in style.
- zamalek 2y agoPeople get pretty riled up about the likes of Haskell, Elm, and OCaml. Rust brings some of the virtues of functional into procedural code/average developer hands, and out of "monads are just a monoid in the category of endofunctors." At the end of day, people are afraid of functional languages. It doesn't matter how amazing they are if almost everyone is too scared to use them.
- tome 2y agoWhy are people afraid of functional languages?
- randomdata 2y agoPeople meaning him, which is why he won't "chest thump" anything related to functional programming. After all, chest thumping is a display of dominance. The others witnessing the chest thumping are meant to be scared. You wouldn't hold back because they are scared. Which is to say that he is not actually afraid, it's just a roundabout way to say that the only reason he is on the Rust trumpeting bandwagon is because it what is in fashion.
- zamalek 2y agoThis sums it up pretty well (I disagree that "functional sucks"). https://youtu.be/nuML9SmdbJ4?si=DEBaHcAvvxO_Ez93 https://youtu.be/nuML9SmdbJ4?si=DEBaHcAvvxO_Ez93 There is a lot of jargon, and that presents an extremely high hurdle for newcomers (especially for those without formal mathematical education). Bizarrely, C++ has a worse version of the same problem: the "modernization specs" are tribal jargon heavy. Compare that with the likes of JS, people learn that in a few weeks bootcamp. Rust absolutely has hurdles, but you can be largely successful without ever touching them (you can get a surprising amount done without ever worrying about lifetimes).
- randomdata 2y ago> Rust brings some of the virtues of functional into procedural code/average developer hands But so does, say, ATS and does a better job on the aforementioned merits. But, indeed, it is not in fashion. > At the end of day, people are afraid of functional languages. To be fair, they are also afraid of Rust.
- kevlar700 2y agoI'm not afraid of functional programming. I just dislike it. I avoid recursion in Ada personally (others like it). I think OOP is over rated and the clarity of imperative is under rated. Though I do like how Ada provides object oriented design to imperative programs even without touching Adas OOP features (tagged types).