Is there any surprise here? Anecdotally Node seems fast for interpreters, but of <i>course</i> a compiled systems language like Rust blows it away. That’s a known trade off you make when picking a technology like Node; there are plenty of <i>other</i> reasons to use it.
It calls expressjs minimalist, but it has 52 dependencies.<p>I really feel like we really need to reconsider what "minimalist" means in the js ecosystem.
Can someone ELI5 the node code sample?<p>> full = full == "true";<p>Umm.. Why?<p>> if (!!limit<p>Not not limit? Is this due to some corner case conversion for JS to make 100% sure this gets into a boolean..?<p>I'm sure both samples have its reasoning, I'm just not aware. Any help please?
A lot of Rust advocating here lately. But most miss the point. Nobody doubts the performance, efficiency, packaging solution or language design of Rust.<p>A more interesting question is:<p>As a CTO: Why would or wouldn't you choose Rust over Java, Node or Go?<p>Rust is not a new language (started in 2006, 1.0 Release in 2015). Why is its adoption kind of disappointing compared to its technical value?<p>The answers are not even more benchmarks or another even more wicked zero cost abstraction async runtime.<p>I'd like to read stories about some real world adoption. Can your average Java or Go devs become proficient in Rust in a reasonable amount of time? Is the code really mostly maintaince free, once it has compiled? Would it have been cheaper to just add some more servers to handle the load? How about large teams working on large domains (Java land)?
It's worth recalling DHH's report that Ruby code only accounts for 15% of the cost of running Basecamp: <a href="https://m.signalvnoise.com/only-15-of-the-basecamp-operations-budget-is-spent-on-ruby/" rel="nofollow">https://m.signalvnoise.com/only-15-of-the-basecamp-operation...</a>
I understand that using Actix really highlights the speed advantage of Rust... but I think it's irresponsible to encourage rewrites in Rust using a framework that's dead because the developer decided to quit instead of fix security issues[0]. The last thing we need is a bunch of new Rust devs rewriting their perfectly fine Node code using an insecure framework.<p>Rust is really fast, especially compared to Node. This is an easy benchmark to win. So why not use a framework that's actually secure.<p>0. <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22073908" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22073908</a>