4 ms·

I don't get the need for Rust since I happily compile common lisp to machine code when I need fast binaries. But the people who use the language have an amazin

I don't get the need for Rust since I happily compile common lisp to machine code when I need fast binaries. But the people who use the language have an amazing talent to make people on the fence hate them within half a dozen sentences. They remind me of Christian missionaries trying to convert the savages from their barbarous religions with human sacrifice to the civilised religion with burning heretics.

noobermin 1y ago
[flagged]
- kaoD 1y ago
  Well, so far this thread has 0 people shilling Rust, a couple shilling Common Lisp and a bunch complaining about Rust shills (you included). Makes you think, huh?
  - testdelacc1 1y ago
    [flagged]
Antibabelic 1y ago
Many programmers feel the same way about Lispers. It's best to set aside your gut feelings about the community and think primarily about the technical and organizational merits and disadvantages of the technology.
- noosphr 1y ago
  Yes, but we're not making a push to make everything a bilingual c/lisp code base. Rust people for some reason are.
  - mdhb 1y ago
    Not a Rust or even a systems language guy but it’s not “for some reason”. The reason is actually incredibly clear and about removing the single largest surface area of security problems in the entire history of Linux.
    - hulitu 1y ago
      > The reason is actually incredibly clear There is no guarantee that other bugs do not flurish in the rust echosystem. There are no publicly known quality code checks of rust programs except a big "trust us"(see firefox with all its CVEs, despite "rust"). And combined with the Cargo echosystem, where every malicious actor can inject malware is a big warning sign.
      - bestouff 1y ago
        There are guarantees that many types of bugs won't happen in Rust code. That alone is a great progress.
      - kaoD 1y ago
        I might be misunderstanding here but... what you're saying is that Rust programs can still have bugs? Isn't that the same as other programs except Rust prevents the most disastrous and common bugs that lead to most CVEs? If I got that right, how is "it's still not perfect" an argument? Agree with the Cargo objection.
        kasabali 1y ago
        If perfect isn't needed, we might as well stick with the 20+ years old mature codebase, there's no need to move to another language. I mean the "code to parse .deb, .ar, .tar," is done and whatever memory bugs should've been already fixed . Use Rust for evergreen projects by all means, just leave mature tested systems alone, please.
        tialaramex 1y ago
        OK? So, is your position that Debian is only for software that's old enough to vote? Or maybe Debian should never rely on any software written after 2015?
  - dicytea 1y ago
    One of the most iconic lisp saying is literally about how every other languages are supposedly inferior to lisp, so I don't think it's a particularly good example here.
    - Keyframe 1y ago
      You mean the one that all languages eventually converge to Lisp? That's a fact though :)
    - noosphr 1y ago
      Yes, the blind stumble down hill eventually. But we let them do it in their own time.
- lsaferite 1y ago
  I have similar feelings about the go community. I like go on the whole, but certain aspects are atrocious. The 'go community' is strangely cult-like and complaining about the language is generally poorly received. As a result I very rarely interact with them and just do my own thing.
codedokode 1y ago
How can lisp be fast if it doesn't have static typing and uses GC?
- tmtvl 1y ago
  As a GC language Common Lisp is slow as molasses. However, in the realm of languages which are slow as molasses it's got quite acceptable performance. I suppose it's in part because it's alien technology from beyond the bounds of the multiverse, but also in part due to the fact that we had really interesting tech back in the '70s and '80s that kinda got lost during the so-called AI winter. To add on to that, with declarations the programmer can tell the Lisp compiler that (for example) a variable can be stack allocated to help improve performance. The fact that Lisp code is just data is another benefit towards performance as it means macros are relatively easy to write so some computation can be done at compile time. There are also various useful utilities in the spec which can be used to help profile execution of a program to aid in optimization, such as time and trace.
  - dokyun 1y ago
    News flash, but Lisp compilers have gotten better since the 80's. In general, normal, unoptimized Lisp is probably on-par with Java, while optimized Lisp with a good compiler can get on par with C++. SBCL is a very good compiler, and GC technology has come a long way.
    - tmtvl 1y ago
      SBCL is fantastic, but the resources being poured in GCC and LLVM combined with CPU manufacturers including architectural features to help C and related procedural languages work better make it a massive uphill battle. I suppose that with proper use of things like sb-simd and arena allocation you can get in the ballpark of C, but with some tweaking C, C++, and Rust can get insanely fast (of course Fortran's better, but nothing compares to it, so let's leave that aside for now).
littlestymaar 1y ago
> Christian missionaries trying to convert the savages Fast forward 5 centuries, it turns out they were in fact pretty successful as South America central Africa are the places where Catholicism is the most active today, far more than in Europe.
- ExoticPearTree 1y ago
  Yes, by doing a lit of killing in those places.
  - littlestymaar 1y ago
    Not from religious people, by a very large margin.
    - defrost 1y ago
      Less killing, considerably more buggery: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-01-29/former-bishop-broome-christopher-alan-saunders-new-charges/104870656 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-01-29/former-bishop-broome-... The Christian Brothers missions were hell holes across the undeveloped regions. * https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/02/child-migrants-shipped-to-western-australia-tell-of-abuse-by-christian-brothers https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/02/child-migran... * https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-studies/case-study-11-christian-brothers https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-studies/ca...
thiht 1y ago
> I don't get the need for Rust since I happily compile common lisp to machine code when I need fast binaries. Not sure how that’s relevant when CL is basically dead and no one wants to work with it, while Rust is flourishing and delivering value
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- dokyun 1y ago
  Rust isn't 'delivering value', people are just drinking the koolaid. CL has its niches, and it still fills them well: it's never been that successful as a general-purpose language.
  - jodrellblank 1y ago
    > Rust isn't 'delivering value' Citation needed. Or, what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed by pointing to ripgrep.
    - dokyun 1y ago
      Oh wow a replacement for a tool I already have. It's slightly faster, even if I seldom ever worry about its speed. Who cares?
      - jodrellblank 1y ago
        57000 people who have starred its repository on Github care. More evidence than you have provided for your claim "Rust isn't delivering value", what did you use to come to that conclusion?
        dokyun 1y ago
        It's a toy. Cool project, but it's a replacement for something that already exists and does its job well. All it demonstrates is "we micro-optimized our libraries more than GNU". It doesn't say anything about the advantages of Rust itself.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
opengrass 1y ago
[flagged]
undeveloper 1y ago
"why use C when I could simply link to node?"

noobermin 1y ago

[flagged]

kaoD 1y ago
Well, so far this thread has 0 people shilling Rust, a couple shilling Common Lisp and a bunch complaining about Rust shills (you included). Makes you think, huh?
- testdelacc1 1y ago
  [flagged]

Antibabelic 1y ago

Many programmers feel the same way about Lispers. It's best to set aside your gut feelings about the community and think primarily about the technical and organizational merits and disadvantages of the technology.

noosphr 1y ago
Yes, but we're not making a push to make everything a bilingual c/lisp code base. Rust people for some reason are.
- mdhb 1y ago
  Not a Rust or even a systems language guy but it’s not “for some reason”. The reason is actually incredibly clear and about removing the single largest surface area of security problems in the entire history of Linux.
  - hulitu 1y ago
    > The reason is actually incredibly clear There is no guarantee that other bugs do not flurish in the rust echosystem. There are no publicly known quality code checks of rust programs except a big "trust us"(see firefox with all its CVEs, despite "rust"). And combined with the Cargo echosystem, where every malicious actor can inject malware is a big warning sign.
    - bestouff 1y ago
      There are guarantees that many types of bugs won't happen in Rust code. That alone is a great progress.
    - kaoD 1y ago
      I might be misunderstanding here but... what you're saying is that Rust programs can still have bugs? Isn't that the same as other programs except Rust prevents the most disastrous and common bugs that lead to most CVEs? If I got that right, how is "it's still not perfect" an argument? Agree with the Cargo objection.
      - kasabali 1y ago
        If perfect isn't needed, we might as well stick with the 20+ years old mature codebase, there's no need to move to another language. I mean the "code to parse .deb, .ar, .tar," is done and whatever memory bugs should've been already fixed . Use Rust for evergreen projects by all means, just leave mature tested systems alone, please.
        tialaramex 1y ago
        OK? So, is your position that Debian is only for software that's old enough to vote? Or maybe Debian should never rely on any software written after 2015?
- dicytea 1y ago
  One of the most iconic lisp saying is literally about how every other languages are supposedly inferior to lisp, so I don't think it's a particularly good example here.
  - Keyframe 1y ago
    You mean the one that all languages eventually converge to Lisp? That's a fact though :)
  - noosphr 1y ago
    Yes, the blind stumble down hill eventually. But we let them do it in their own time.
lsaferite 1y ago
I have similar feelings about the go community. I like go on the whole, but certain aspects are atrocious. The 'go community' is strangely cult-like and complaining about the language is generally poorly received. As a result I very rarely interact with them and just do my own thing.

codedokode 1y ago

How can lisp be fast if it doesn't have static typing and uses GC?

tmtvl 1y ago
As a GC language Common Lisp is slow as molasses. However, in the realm of languages which are slow as molasses it's got quite acceptable performance. I suppose it's in part because it's alien technology from beyond the bounds of the multiverse, but also in part due to the fact that we had really interesting tech back in the '70s and '80s that kinda got lost during the so-called AI winter. To add on to that, with declarations the programmer can tell the Lisp compiler that (for example) a variable can be stack allocated to help improve performance. The fact that Lisp code is just data is another benefit towards performance as it means macros are relatively easy to write so some computation can be done at compile time. There are also various useful utilities in the spec which can be used to help profile execution of a program to aid in optimization, such as time and trace.
- dokyun 1y ago
  News flash, but Lisp compilers have gotten better since the 80's. In general, normal, unoptimized Lisp is probably on-par with Java, while optimized Lisp with a good compiler can get on par with C++. SBCL is a very good compiler, and GC technology has come a long way.
  - tmtvl 1y ago
    SBCL is fantastic, but the resources being poured in GCC and LLVM combined with CPU manufacturers including architectural features to help C and related procedural languages work better make it a massive uphill battle. I suppose that with proper use of things like sb-simd and arena allocation you can get in the ballpark of C, but with some tweaking C, C++, and Rust can get insanely fast (of course Fortran's better, but nothing compares to it, so let's leave that aside for now).

littlestymaar 1y ago

> Christian missionaries trying to convert the savages Fast forward 5 centuries, it turns out they were in fact pretty successful as South America central Africa are the places where Catholicism is the most active today, far more than in Europe.

ExoticPearTree 1y ago
Yes, by doing a lit of killing in those places.
- littlestymaar 1y ago
  Not from religious people, by a very large margin.
  - defrost 1y ago
    Less killing, considerably more buggery: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-01-29/former-bishop-broome-christopher-alan-saunders-new-charges/104870656 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-01-29/former-bishop-broome-... The Christian Brothers missions were hell holes across the undeveloped regions. * https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/02/child-migrants-shipped-to-western-australia-tell-of-abuse-by-christian-brothers https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/02/child-migran... * https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-studies/case-study-11-christian-brothers https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-studies/ca...

thiht 1y ago

> I don't get the need for Rust since I happily compile common lisp to machine code when I need fast binaries. Not sure how that’s relevant when CL is basically dead and no one wants to work with it, while Rust is flourishing and delivering value

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
dokyun 1y ago
Rust isn't 'delivering value', people are just drinking the koolaid. CL has its niches, and it still fills them well: it's never been that successful as a general-purpose language.
- jodrellblank 1y ago
  > Rust isn't 'delivering value' Citation needed. Or, what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed by pointing to ripgrep.
  - dokyun 1y ago
    Oh wow a replacement for a tool I already have. It's slightly faster, even if I seldom ever worry about its speed. Who cares?
    - jodrellblank 1y ago
      57000 people who have starred its repository on Github care. More evidence than you have provided for your claim "Rust isn't delivering value", what did you use to come to that conclusion?
      - dokyun 1y ago
        It's a toy. Cool project, but it's a replacement for something that already exists and does its job well. All it demonstrates is "we micro-optimized our libraries more than GNU". It doesn't say anything about the advantages of Rust itself.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

opengrass 1y ago

[flagged]

undeveloper 1y ago

"why use C when I could simply link to node?"