4 ms·
I'd argue Rust is one of the most "unfun" languages in terms of syntax but it's offset by the crates ecosystem and cargo toolchain being easily the most pleasan
by nylonstrung 2mo ago
I'd argue Rust is one of the most "unfun" languages in terms of syntax but it's offset by the crates ecosystem and cargo toolchain being easily the most pleasant within systems programming
No matter if C or C++ was more "fun", CMake is not and I think the the "fun" parts of coding are worse with Rust but the particularly unpleasant ones are relatively good. In that sense Rust's success might be due to it being more or a "pain pill" than a "vitamin"
Michael Hashimoto has made comments to the effect that Zig is attractive to him relative to Rust simply because it's more enjoyable to write but I think there's very few people for whom that could outweigh the lack of ecosystem
- ch4s3 2mo agoAgreed, rust is SUPER not fun IMHO but I use it a lot via FFI for things I wouldn't do in Elixir which I prefer to write/read. The broad array of well built tools on cargo is just so hard to compete with, and cargo as a tool beats any language tooling for any language with similar breadth. The JVM has every tool imaginable but I'd rather built it myself than tangle with JVM tooling.
- asa400 2mo agoI'm fluent in Rust and I find it quite enjoyable to read and write, more so than almost any other language I know. But, that's a subjective opinion, I wouldn't expect others to feel the same. Rust probably has more to learn and is indeed probably _more difficult to learn_ than Zig in that it's simply a bigger language (which is quantifiable, even if only approximately) but difficultly of learning vs. enjoyment of reading/writing/speaking are different questions. It's a bit like saying German is unfun to read and write. To who? To Germans?