3 ms·

I might be out of the loop, is there an actual 'anti-Rust' movement? or effort? even something organized and funded to push anti-Rust sentiment? Rust doesn't h

I might be out of the loop, is there an actual 'anti-Rust' movement? or effort? even something organized and funded to push anti-Rust sentiment? Rust doesn't have a big backer with deep pockets, like GO does. This is all valuable feedback. But Rust is new, so libraries are still in flux. That happens with being 'new'. This seems more like single dev running out of time. Not a huge condemnation of Rust.

oguz-ismail 2y ago
> Rust doesn't have a big backer with deep pockets https://foundation.rust-lang.org/members/ https://foundation.rust-lang.org/members/
hresvelgr 2y ago
It's a condemnation of the library maintainers in the Rust ecosystem. Moreover it's endemic of the same mindset fueling "Rewrite it in Rust." A constant pursuit of correcting what seems not quite right with user experience being an afterthought. I am sympathetic to OSS being thankless and largely volunteer work, but for projects as big as wgpu and the like, the amount of instability given its popularity is unseemly.
steveklabnik 2y ago
> is there an actual 'anti-Rust' movement? There have always been people who have been skeptical of, or dislike, Rust. Just like every technology. > even something organized and funded to push anti-Rust sentiment? Nah, anyone who believes this is engaging in conspiracy theory.
noirscape 2y ago
Rust has been releasing since 2006 (going off of Wikipedia). It's picking up in popularity as the ecosystem is reaching a form of maturity, but it's hardly new. That in mind, the main reason why people tend to get frustrated with Rust to the point of condemning it is because Rust programmers tend to be rather zealous of how much they want to spread it's use, even in domains where it's more a disadvantage than a strength (game dev is the most obvious example, but Rust is a quagmire of constant rewrites if you have any form of rapid iteration or unstable specs). When those disadvantages subsequently pop up and become an issue, the response from Rust programmers often amounts to "you're holding it wrong", which just makes people curious about the language more annoyed since it comes across like their problems aren't being taken seriously. It's perhaps no surprise that Rust communities oft find overlap with Wayland and Nix zealots because of this, where the shortcomings of their tools aren't an impediment to getting as many people as possible to use their tools. I don't think it's any concerted movement, it's just that people tend to get annoyed when they're preached to even when what's being preached doesn't work for them, so they push back against it.
- steveklabnik 2y ago
  > Rust has been releasing since 2006 (going off of Wikipedia). It was a personal project then. It wasn't until 2009 that it was shared more publicly, and the first stable release was in 2015. That's still almost ten years ago, so your overall conclusion about it not being new is not incorrect, but it's not as old as you suggest here.
J_Shelby_J 2y ago
The “anti” movement is a result of a shift in the industry. At this point it’s pretty clear to all people watching that rust is winning the long term game to become the “standard language”. It’s pretty natural for such a shift to make people have feelings. That said, if you actually look at the things the critics are saying, most of them are from a place of misunderstandings. Every time there is some Rust drama, tech influencers like primagen are doing back bends to be “fair”, even if it means given reasonable doubt to an unreasonable position, lest they turn off audience members who are too emotionally invested in seeing Rust be bad because it validates their choices.
- flohofwoe 2y ago
  > At this point it’s pretty clear to all people watching that rust is winning the long term game to become the “standard language”. What a weird thing to say. There is no 'standard language', never has been and never will be (otherwise we'd all be programming in Java or Javascript, which during their heydays were 'obviously' becoming the 'future standard programming language').
cptnapalm 2y ago
From what I've seen (so grains of salt required), it's less the language and more the people who evangelize, AKA the Rust Evangelism Strike Force (https://enet4.github.io/rust-tropes/rust-evangelism-strike-force/ https://enet4.github.io/rust-tropes/rust-evangelism-strike-f...).
FrustratedMonky 2y ago
Funny Ask innocent question about why there seems to be a lot of drama, negative feedback about Rust. Get downvoted. Isn't this part of the problem? Can't ask about it without inviting backlash? Was only asking in this way, because a lot of the negative feedback in the entire thread, seemed counter to how things actually are in Rust. Kind of like FUD.

oguz-ismail 2y ago

> Rust doesn't have a big backer with deep pockets https://foundation.rust-lang.org/members/ https://foundation.rust-lang.org/members/

hresvelgr 2y ago

It's a condemnation of the library maintainers in the Rust ecosystem. Moreover it's endemic of the same mindset fueling "Rewrite it in Rust." A constant pursuit of correcting what seems not quite right with user experience being an afterthought. I am sympathetic to OSS being thankless and largely volunteer work, but for projects as big as wgpu and the like, the amount of instability given its popularity is unseemly.

steveklabnik 2y ago

> is there an actual 'anti-Rust' movement? There have always been people who have been skeptical of, or dislike, Rust. Just like every technology. > even something organized and funded to push anti-Rust sentiment? Nah, anyone who believes this is engaging in conspiracy theory.

noirscape 2y ago

Rust has been releasing since 2006 (going off of Wikipedia). It's picking up in popularity as the ecosystem is reaching a form of maturity, but it's hardly new. That in mind, the main reason why people tend to get frustrated with Rust to the point of condemning it is because Rust programmers tend to be rather zealous of how much they want to spread it's use, even in domains where it's more a disadvantage than a strength (game dev is the most obvious example, but Rust is a quagmire of constant rewrites if you have any form of rapid iteration or unstable specs). When those disadvantages subsequently pop up and become an issue, the response from Rust programmers often amounts to "you're holding it wrong", which just makes people curious about the language more annoyed since it comes across like their problems aren't being taken seriously. It's perhaps no surprise that Rust communities oft find overlap with Wayland and Nix zealots because of this, where the shortcomings of their tools aren't an impediment to getting as many people as possible to use their tools. I don't think it's any concerted movement, it's just that people tend to get annoyed when they're preached to even when what's being preached doesn't work for them, so they push back against it.

steveklabnik 2y ago
> Rust has been releasing since 2006 (going off of Wikipedia). It was a personal project then. It wasn't until 2009 that it was shared more publicly, and the first stable release was in 2015. That's still almost ten years ago, so your overall conclusion about it not being new is not incorrect, but it's not as old as you suggest here.

J_Shelby_J 2y ago

The “anti” movement is a result of a shift in the industry. At this point it’s pretty clear to all people watching that rust is winning the long term game to become the “standard language”. It’s pretty natural for such a shift to make people have feelings. That said, if you actually look at the things the critics are saying, most of them are from a place of misunderstandings. Every time there is some Rust drama, tech influencers like primagen are doing back bends to be “fair”, even if it means given reasonable doubt to an unreasonable position, lest they turn off audience members who are too emotionally invested in seeing Rust be bad because it validates their choices.

flohofwoe 2y ago
> At this point it’s pretty clear to all people watching that rust is winning the long term game to become the “standard language”. What a weird thing to say. There is no 'standard language', never has been and never will be (otherwise we'd all be programming in Java or Javascript, which during their heydays were 'obviously' becoming the 'future standard programming language').

cptnapalm 2y ago

From what I've seen (so grains of salt required), it's less the language and more the people who evangelize, AKA the Rust Evangelism Strike Force (https://enet4.github.io/rust-tropes/rust-evangelism-strike-force/ https://enet4.github.io/rust-tropes/rust-evangelism-strike-f...).

FrustratedMonky 2y ago

Funny Ask innocent question about why there seems to be a lot of drama, negative feedback about Rust. Get downvoted. Isn't this part of the problem? Can't ask about it without inviting backlash? Was only asking in this way, because a lot of the negative feedback in the entire thread, seemed counter to how things actually are in Rust. Kind of like FUD.