15 ms·

Sounds like an abusive relationship if im being honest. Your programming language shouldnt constrict you in those ways.

lagniappe 1y ago
It helps to understand the cultural ethos of the original rust devs, and the situation that gave rise to it.
jplusequalt 1y ago
>Your programming language shouldn't constrict you in those ways Says who? Programming languages come in all shapes and sizes, and each has their tradeoffs. Rust's tradeoff is that the compiler is very opinionated about what constitutes a valid program. But in turn it provides comparable performance to C/C++ without many of the same bugs/security vulnerabilities.
- atoav 1y ago
  Also: everybody can write a program that does the thing it is intended to do. That is the easy part. The hard part is writing a program that does not do things it isn't intended to do while existing in a ever changing environment and even be subjected to changes of its own source code. So the hard part isn't getting code to work, it is ensuring it is only working in the intended ways, even when your co-worker (or your future self) acts like an unhinged, unristricted idiot. And that means using enforced type systems, validation, strict rules. If you are a beginner cobbling hobby programs an anything-goes approach to software may feel nice and like freedom, but beyond a certain level of complexity it will land you in a world of pain. Any great C programmer whose code I ever had the pleasure of reading has a plethora of unwritten rules they enforce through their heads. And these rules exist there for a reason. When you have a language that enforces these rules for you, that gives you the freedom to dare more, not less, as certain things would be very risky with manual checking. It is like the foam pit in extreme sports. While it is certainly more manly to break your neck in ten consecutive tripple-backflip tries, you are going to get there faster with a foam pit where you can try out things. And the foam pit transforms the whole scene, becaus people can now write code that before would crash and burn without feeling restricted. Funny how that goes.
  - freilanzer 1y ago
    Restrictions foster creativity, and also free up mindspace to think about your actual problem in more detail.
hbn 1y ago
Every programming language has constrictions by the nature of having syntax. In JavaScript you can declare a variable, set it to 5 (number), and then set it to the "hello" (string), but that's not allowed in e.g. C. Is C constricting me too much because I have to do it in C's way?
- dgfitz 1y ago
  I believe you can do that in C pretty easily with a void pointer, someone correct me if I'm mistaken. Should you? Different question entirely.
  - quietbritishjim 1y ago
    But you can't add 2 void pointers and seamlessly get integer addition if they point at integers or concatenation if they point at strings. (You could build your own custom data types that have type metadata in a shared header and an addition function that uses it, but then you're building your own custom language on top which isn't really the same thing.) So yes C really does restrict you in some ways that Javascript doesn't.
    - dgfitz 1y ago
      That wasn't the constraint I was responding to, you moved the goalposts! :)
  - int_19h 1y ago
    Pedantically speaking, you can't. You can have a variable that points to an integer 5, and then make it point to a character array "hello\0". But the value of the variable is a pointer in both cases. Curiously enough, this is also true of Python - just less obvious because it doesn't have any variables that aren't pointers, and most operators perform an implicit dereference.
    - boomlinde 1y ago
      > Pedantically speaking, you can't. You can have a variable that points to an integer 5, and then make it point to a character array "hello\0". But the value of the variable is a pointer in both cases. Unions may be the better analog here. > Curiously enough, this is also true of Python - just less obvious because it doesn't have any variables that aren't pointers, and most operators perform an implicit dereference. That's more like an implementation detail than a quality of the language itself. A JavaScript implementation might do the same. For example, values in V8 are all either pointers to the heap except in the case of small (31-bit) integers, and a less optimized implementation might not even make that distinction and allocate everything on the heap. Similarly, a Python implementation might store SMIs directly where the pointer would be, like V8. PyPy uses both tagged pointers/SMIs and may even allocate registers for values.
ModernMech 1y ago
Abusive relationships involve coercion, control, fear, and often violate personal autonomy and consent. One party dominates the other in a harmful way. Using Rust is not harmful. Placing restrictions on the programs a programmer can write is not abusive. The rules exist to ensure clarity, safety, performance, and design goals. In an abusive relationship, rules are created to control or punish behavior, often changing capriciously and without reason or consultation. By contrast, Rust is designed by a group of people who work together to advance the language according to a set of articulated goals. The rules are clear and do not change capriciously. Abuse causes emotional trauma, isolation, and long-term harm. Rust may cause feelings of frustration and annoyance, it may make you a less efficient programmer, but using it does not cause psychological or physical harm found in abusive relationships.
freilanzer 1y ago
If your compiler does not let you compile garbage code, then it's restricting you, but that's exactly what you want - you don't want to compile something that is incorrect. Rust just enforces more rules than, say, Ruby or C/C++.

It helps to understand the cultural ethos of the original rust devs, and the situation that gave rise to it.

>Your programming language shouldn't constrict you in those ways Says who? Programming languages come in all shapes and sizes, and each has their tradeoffs. Rust's tradeoff is that the compiler is very opinionated about what constitutes a valid program. But in turn it provides comparable performance to C/C++ without many of the same bugs/security vulnerabilities.

atoav 1y ago
Also: everybody can write a program that does the thing it is intended to do. That is the easy part. The hard part is writing a program that does not do things it isn't intended to do while existing in a ever changing environment and even be subjected to changes of its own source code. So the hard part isn't getting code to work, it is ensuring it is only working in the intended ways, even when your co-worker (or your future self) acts like an unhinged, unristricted idiot. And that means using enforced type systems, validation, strict rules. If you are a beginner cobbling hobby programs an anything-goes approach to software may feel nice and like freedom, but beyond a certain level of complexity it will land you in a world of pain. Any great C programmer whose code I ever had the pleasure of reading has a plethora of unwritten rules they enforce through their heads. And these rules exist there for a reason. When you have a language that enforces these rules for you, that gives you the freedom to dare more, not less, as certain things would be very risky with manual checking. It is like the foam pit in extreme sports. While it is certainly more manly to break your neck in ten consecutive tripple-backflip tries, you are going to get there faster with a foam pit where you can try out things. And the foam pit transforms the whole scene, becaus people can now write code that before would crash and burn without feeling restricted. Funny how that goes.
- freilanzer 1y ago
  Restrictions foster creativity, and also free up mindspace to think about your actual problem in more detail.

hbn 1y ago

Every programming language has constrictions by the nature of having syntax. In JavaScript you can declare a variable, set it to 5 (number), and then set it to the "hello" (string), but that's not allowed in e.g. C. Is C constricting me too much because I have to do it in C's way?

dgfitz 1y ago
I believe you can do that in C pretty easily with a void pointer, someone correct me if I'm mistaken. Should you? Different question entirely.
- quietbritishjim 1y ago
  But you can't add 2 void pointers and seamlessly get integer addition if they point at integers or concatenation if they point at strings. (You could build your own custom data types that have type metadata in a shared header and an addition function that uses it, but then you're building your own custom language on top which isn't really the same thing.) So yes C really does restrict you in some ways that Javascript doesn't.
  - dgfitz 1y ago
    That wasn't the constraint I was responding to, you moved the goalposts! :)
- int_19h 1y ago
  Pedantically speaking, you can't. You can have a variable that points to an integer 5, and then make it point to a character array "hello\0". But the value of the variable is a pointer in both cases. Curiously enough, this is also true of Python - just less obvious because it doesn't have any variables that aren't pointers, and most operators perform an implicit dereference.
  - boomlinde 1y ago
    > Pedantically speaking, you can't. You can have a variable that points to an integer 5, and then make it point to a character array "hello\0". But the value of the variable is a pointer in both cases. Unions may be the better analog here. > Curiously enough, this is also true of Python - just less obvious because it doesn't have any variables that aren't pointers, and most operators perform an implicit dereference. That's more like an implementation detail than a quality of the language itself. A JavaScript implementation might do the same. For example, values in V8 are all either pointers to the heap except in the case of small (31-bit) integers, and a less optimized implementation might not even make that distinction and allocate everything on the heap. Similarly, a Python implementation might store SMIs directly where the pointer would be, like V8. PyPy uses both tagged pointers/SMIs and may even allocate registers for values.

ModernMech 1y ago

Abusive relationships involve coercion, control, fear, and often violate personal autonomy and consent. One party dominates the other in a harmful way. Using Rust is not harmful. Placing restrictions on the programs a programmer can write is not abusive. The rules exist to ensure clarity, safety, performance, and design goals. In an abusive relationship, rules are created to control or punish behavior, often changing capriciously and without reason or consultation. By contrast, Rust is designed by a group of people who work together to advance the language according to a set of articulated goals. The rules are clear and do not change capriciously. Abuse causes emotional trauma, isolation, and long-term harm. Rust may cause feelings of frustration and annoyance, it may make you a less efficient programmer, but using it does not cause psychological or physical harm found in abusive relationships.

freilanzer 1y ago

If your compiler does not let you compile garbage code, then it's restricting you, but that's exactly what you want - you don't want to compile something that is incorrect. Rust just enforces more rules than, say, Ruby or C/C++.