7 ms·

People really like to hate on Rust for some reason. This wasn’t a Rust problem, no language would have saved them from this kind of issue. In fact, the compiler

People really like to hate on Rust for some reason. This wasn’t a Rust problem, no language would have saved them from this kind of issue. In fact, the compiler would have warned that this was a possible issue. I get it, don’t pick languages just because they are trendy, but if any company’s use case is a perfect fit for Rust it’s cloudflare.

SchemaLoad 1y ago
Yeah even if you handled this situation without unwrap() if you just went down an error path that didn't panic, the service would likely still be inoperable if every single request went down the error path.
- HL33tibCe7 1y ago
  Okay, but if you returned a wrapped error it’d at least be easier to debug.
  - VMG 11mo ago
    not necessarily, by default `Result` does not even carry a stack trace
samdoesnothing 1y ago
The reason why people are criticizing is because Rust evangelicals say stuff like "if it compiles it works" or talk about how Rust's type system is so much better than other languages that it catches logic errors like this. You won't see Go or Java developers making such strong claims about their preferred languages.
- Patryk27 1y ago
  > [...] it catches logic errors like this but Rust's type system did catch this error - and then author decided it's fine to panic if this error happens > You won't see Go or Java developers making such strong claims about their preferred languages. yess no Java developer ever said that OOP will solve world hunger
  - samdoesnothing 1y ago
    > but Rust's type system did catch this error - and then author decided it's fine to panic if this error happens The issue is that it wasn't fine to panic, thus Rust did not catch this error.
    - yoyohello13 11mo ago
      Come on now. You can't blame the compiler when the programmer explicitly told the compiler to not worry about it. There is nothing in existence that can protect against something like that.
      - samdoesnothing 11mo ago
        I'm not blaming the compiler, of course programmers can explicitly write incorrect code in any language. It's not Rust's fault.

SchemaLoad 1y ago

Yeah even if you handled this situation without unwrap() if you just went down an error path that didn't panic, the service would likely still be inoperable if every single request went down the error path.

HL33tibCe7 1y ago
Okay, but if you returned a wrapped error it’d at least be easier to debug.
- VMG 11mo ago
  not necessarily, by default `Result` does not even carry a stack trace

samdoesnothing 1y ago

The reason why people are criticizing is because Rust evangelicals say stuff like "if it compiles it works" or talk about how Rust's type system is so much better than other languages that it catches logic errors like this. You won't see Go or Java developers making such strong claims about their preferred languages.

Patryk27 1y ago
> [...] it catches logic errors like this but Rust's type system did catch this error - and then author decided it's fine to panic if this error happens > You won't see Go or Java developers making such strong claims about their preferred languages. yess no Java developer ever said that OOP will solve world hunger
- samdoesnothing 1y ago
  > but Rust's type system did catch this error - and then author decided it's fine to panic if this error happens The issue is that it wasn't fine to panic, thus Rust did not catch this error.
  - yoyohello13 11mo ago
    Come on now. You can't blame the compiler when the programmer explicitly told the compiler to not worry about it. There is nothing in existence that can protect against something like that.
    - samdoesnothing 11mo ago
      I'm not blaming the compiler, of course programmers can explicitly write incorrect code in any language. It's not Rust's fault.