im so tired of non-substance rust content on hn. i dont want to know THAT it is written in rust (shocking, i know!) I want to know WHAT made it better to be in rust rather than x. I'd read the shit out of an article about that. its starting to become a meme cheatcode, just add "in rust!" to the end of your post title and you'll get a baseline starter pack of hn votes
i may not have read the article correctly, but i see no actual evidence there that it is the "world's fastest growing language", whatever that might mean, except that there a lot of questions about it on SO (and of course posts like this on HN).<p>also, possibly related, isn't it strange you see almost no more haskell posts here these days?
It's great the memory-safe languages that don't sacrifice performance are growing in popularity. But I must ask, what does Rust do better than Nim?
I think Rust is probably great for certain types of projects that need effecient programs but the main problem I have always had is not having enough time and Rust does the reverse for me in that regard.<p>It is hard to learn and takes quite some time to write compared to many other popular languages. For what benefit? Most languages are fast enough and the bugs I encounter is not bugs that Rust solves. I do web dev stuff, like I would assume most of us do, and the performance bottlenecks are pretty much never due to the language being too slow.<p>Granted, I understand completely why large companies that work on complex systems have a use case for Rust, the main issue I have with the community is that it tries to sell itself as a solution to everything when in reality the most likely scenario for most of us is that we would be more productive and successful in basically any other language.
These days I code primarily in C++, which is what Rust seemingly is designed to replace. It doesn't, as far as I can tell. I optimize directly for the hardware I'm running on, which typically gives me 10-100x performance improvements. Controlling how memory is managed is critical.<p>It's great when something new and better comes along if that's really the case, but I've seen the "incrementally better in certain use cases" play many times before.
In Github's analysis of fasting growing language they state that Hashicorp Configuration Language was the fastest from 2021 to 2022. In 2021 from Jetbrains it is in the top five of languages to adopt and or replace. I would like to see the data that MIT is using to figure out their thesis.<p><a href="https://octoverse.github.com/2022/top-programming-languages" rel="nofollow">https://octoverse.github.com/2022/top-programming-languages</a>
<a href="https://www.jetbrains.com/lp/devecosystem-2021/" rel="nofollow">https://www.jetbrains.com/lp/devecosystem-2021/</a>
I've been writing some typescript lately. I had gotten a bit bored about Rust but oh man. The weakness of TS makes me really appreciate the sort of invisible things Rust does right.
I would love to know how you build a language that:<p>A) is easy to write one off scripts that do a job fast, with minimal thinking and effort. I am thinking of Python and Ruby. For me I can write code with high velocity in these languages.<p>B) Executes loops very fast and does automatic vectorization<p>C) Can scale toward large teams, such as that you can do drastic changes with faith that things shall not break at runtime.<p>D) zero cost abstractions and minimal indirections.<p>E) predictable runtime performance, no random pauses<p>F) powerful tooling, such as package manager and IDE integration
> “In C or C++ you always have this fear that your code will just randomly explode,” says Mara Bos, cofounder of the drone firm Fusion Engineering and head of Rust’s library team.<p>That sounds like a completely valid reason to abandon C++ over Rust.<p>I mean, what self-respecting programmer that keeps up to date with the trends would use a such a dangerous language that makes code blow up in their face?<p>That is so '80s.<p>Well, I am joking, of course, but that comment is hard to take seriously.
I just wish it was simpler. I never saw it in its infancy, but from what I can gather, it seems a huge amount of bloat was added to the original design.
>"> “In C or C++ you always have this fear that your code will just randomly explode,”<p>No I do not. I have a fear of sectarian fanatism where each sect is trying to force their way of doing things and declaring the rest being evil.
The title of the article is actually, "How Rust went from a side project to the world’s most-loved programming language" .. which is so annoying.<p>"Most-loved" cannot be measured, it's so subjective. Why couldn't they have just said, "fastest growing" or something else? Does everything from media have to be designed to grab eyes, even out of the MIT Technology Review for godssake?
There is a C ssl library and a rust ssl library, which one do you choose?<p>There is also a http library I C and rust , which one do you choose?<p>If C ones are battle tested, I will not choose rust for a simple reason, software is error prone in nature, and believe certain practices will fundamentally change that is just selling snake oil.