4 ms·

The pushback is against the acolytes not the language. If you could separate the language from the acolytes it would have seen much faster adoption.

kaoD 1y ago
In my experience from these threads, there are more people polluting the discussion by complaining about Rust "acolytes" than actual acolytes. Rust haters seem strangely obsessed.
- lelanthran 1y ago
  > Rust haters seem strangely obsessed. Well, this is a great example. People complaining about the community are labeled as people complaining about the language. Do you not see the problem here?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - whilenot-dev 1y ago
    I think you'd need to give answer to your own questioning here... why did you take "Rust haters" as "Rust-language haters", and not as "Rust-community haters"?
    - lelanthran 1y ago
      > I think you'd need to give answer to your own questioning here... why did you take "Rust haters" as "Rust-language haters", and not as "Rust-community haters"? Because it literally says "Rust haters"; not "Rust community haters". Are you saying that when someone refers to "Rust", they mean the community and not the language?
      - whilenot-dev 1y ago
        Yes, you're half way there.
  - timeon 1y ago
    If you change it to "Rust community haters seem strangely obsessed.", it is still valid.
    - lelanthran 1y ago
      > If you change it to "Rust community haters seem strangely obsessed.", it is still valid. Maybe. What does that have to do with the Rust community having such a poor reputation compared to other communities?
  - tayo42 1y ago
    Rust language and rust community are intertwined. It's a design descion from the language creators
testdelacc1 1y ago
Acolytes being the people talking positively about their experience using a language and the strengths they think it has. So the people with positive opinions should say nothing at all, and the people with negative opinions should be free to share. And somehow, you think this will lead to faster adoption. That’s an interesting thought. It would run counter to everything we know about human nature, but interesting nevertheless. Rust is already pretty successful adoption wise. It’s powering significant parts of the internet, it’s been introduced in 3 major operating systems (Windows, Linux, Android), many successful companies in a variety of domains have written their entire tech stack in it. Adoption as measured by crates.io downloads has doubled every year for the last 10 years. Now I’m imagining how much more widely Rust would be used if they had adopted your visionary approach of never saying anything positive about it.
- lelanthran 1y ago
  > Acolytes being the people talking positively about their experience using a language and the strengths they think it has. No, it's the people who have given rise to the multiple Rust memes over the years. I'm battling to think of any other about-to-go-mainstream language that had the reputation of a hostile community. Scala? Kotlin? Swift? Zig? None of those languages have built such poor reputations for their communities. After all, for quite a few years every thread on forums that mentioned C or C++ was derailed by Rust proponents. I didn't see C++ users jumping into Rust threads posting attacks, but there are many examples of Rust users jumping into C++ or C threads, posting attacks. > That’s an interesting thought. It would run counter to everything we know about human nature, but interesting nevertheless. Well, the fact that Rust is an outlier in this sample should tell you everything you need to know; other up-and-coming languages have not, in the past, gotten such a reputation.
  - testdelacc1 1y ago
    > I'm battling to think of any other about-to-go-mainstream language that had the reputation of a hostile community. Because you’re young or you weren't around in 2010 when Go was gaining adoption. Same shit back then. People said “I like the language, it’s quite useful” followed by tirades from people who thought it was the end of human civilisation. It had exactly the reputation you speak of. (“DAE generics???”) Eventually the haters moved on to hating something else. That’s what the Rust haters will do as well. When Zig reaches 1.0 and gains more adoption, the haters will be out in full force.
nicoburns 1y ago
> If you could separate the language from the acolytes it would have seen much faster adoption. Good news: you can. And that's why it has had fast adoption. (those advocating for Rust in "meme-like" ways are not generally the same people actually developing the Rust compiler or the core parts of it's ecosystem)

kaoD 1y ago

In my experience from these threads, there are more people polluting the discussion by complaining about Rust "acolytes" than actual acolytes. Rust haters seem strangely obsessed.

lelanthran 1y ago
> Rust haters seem strangely obsessed. Well, this is a great example. People complaining about the community are labeled as people complaining about the language. Do you not see the problem here?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- whilenot-dev 1y ago
  I think you'd need to give answer to your own questioning here... why did you take "Rust haters" as "Rust-language haters", and not as "Rust-community haters"?
  - lelanthran 1y ago
    > I think you'd need to give answer to your own questioning here... why did you take "Rust haters" as "Rust-language haters", and not as "Rust-community haters"? Because it literally says "Rust haters"; not "Rust community haters". Are you saying that when someone refers to "Rust", they mean the community and not the language?
    - whilenot-dev 1y ago
      Yes, you're half way there.
- timeon 1y ago
  If you change it to "Rust community haters seem strangely obsessed.", it is still valid.
  - lelanthran 1y ago
    > If you change it to "Rust community haters seem strangely obsessed.", it is still valid. Maybe. What does that have to do with the Rust community having such a poor reputation compared to other communities?
- tayo42 1y ago
  Rust language and rust community are intertwined. It's a design descion from the language creators

testdelacc1 1y ago

Acolytes being the people talking positively about their experience using a language and the strengths they think it has. So the people with positive opinions should say nothing at all, and the people with negative opinions should be free to share. And somehow, you think this will lead to faster adoption. That’s an interesting thought. It would run counter to everything we know about human nature, but interesting nevertheless. Rust is already pretty successful adoption wise. It’s powering significant parts of the internet, it’s been introduced in 3 major operating systems (Windows, Linux, Android), many successful companies in a variety of domains have written their entire tech stack in it. Adoption as measured by crates.io downloads has doubled every year for the last 10 years. Now I’m imagining how much more widely Rust would be used if they had adopted your visionary approach of never saying anything positive about it.

lelanthran 1y ago
> Acolytes being the people talking positively about their experience using a language and the strengths they think it has. No, it's the people who have given rise to the multiple Rust memes over the years. I'm battling to think of any other about-to-go-mainstream language that had the reputation of a hostile community. Scala? Kotlin? Swift? Zig? None of those languages have built such poor reputations for their communities. After all, for quite a few years every thread on forums that mentioned C or C++ was derailed by Rust proponents. I didn't see C++ users jumping into Rust threads posting attacks, but there are many examples of Rust users jumping into C++ or C threads, posting attacks. > That’s an interesting thought. It would run counter to everything we know about human nature, but interesting nevertheless. Well, the fact that Rust is an outlier in this sample should tell you everything you need to know; other up-and-coming languages have not, in the past, gotten such a reputation.
- testdelacc1 1y ago
  > I'm battling to think of any other about-to-go-mainstream language that had the reputation of a hostile community. Because you’re young or you weren't around in 2010 when Go was gaining adoption. Same shit back then. People said “I like the language, it’s quite useful” followed by tirades from people who thought it was the end of human civilisation. It had exactly the reputation you speak of. (“DAE generics???”) Eventually the haters moved on to hating something else. That’s what the Rust haters will do as well. When Zig reaches 1.0 and gains more adoption, the haters will be out in full force.

nicoburns 1y ago

> If you could separate the language from the acolytes it would have seen much faster adoption. Good news: you can. And that's why it has had fast adoption. (those advocating for Rust in "meme-like" ways are not generally the same people actually developing the Rust compiler or the core parts of it's ecosystem)