3 ms·
I am A-OK with someone not liking Rust. I do, but it’s still only my 3rd-most used language behind the Python and TypeScript I write at work. It’s just that ti
by kstrauser 2y ago
I am A-OK with someone not liking Rust. I do, but it’s still only my 3rd-most used language behind the Python and TypeScript I write at work.
It’s just that time after time I’ve heard people criticize Rust because they were, in fact, trying to write their pet language in Rust. It’s similar to how many complaints I’ve heard about Python because “it’s weakly typed”. What? Feel free not to like either of them, but make it for the right reasons, not because of a misunderstanding of how they work.
Now, the author of this post may be doing everything right and Rust just isn’t good at the things they want to use it for. The complaint about constantly bumping against the borrow checker leads me to wonder.
- troad 2y ago> It’s similar to how many complaints I’ve heard about Python because “it’s weakly typed”. What? Feel free not to like either of them, but make it for the right reasons, not because of a misunderstanding of how they work. Are you sure you're not just being harsh to people whose grasp of CS vocab is weaker than yours? If someone tells me that Python is 'weakly typed', I translate it in my head to 'dynamically typed', and the rest of their complaint generally makes sense to me, in that the speaker presumably prefers static typing. Which is a valid opinion to hold, not necessarily the result of any misunderstanding.
- kstrauser 2y agoReasonably sure. If it’s clear they actually mean dynamically typed, fine. That’s down to preference, and I won’t say they’re wrong any more than I’ll argue that chocolate is better than strawberry. However, I’ve heard lots of utterly wrong criticisms of Python (and Rust and…) that were based on factual misunderstandings and not just a vocabulary mistake.