Speaking as an annoying Rust user, you’re being bigoted. I’m annoying, but the vast majority of Rust users are normal people who you wouldn’t even know are using Rust.
Don’t lump all the others in with me, they don’t deserve that.
Speaking as an annoying Rust user, you’re being bigoted. I’m annoying, but the vast majority of Rust users are normal people who you wouldn’t even know are using Rust.
Don’t lump all the others in with me, they don’t deserve that.
Rust makes sense though.
I really don’t think that there is any perfect programming language.
You’d be wrong 🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀
I think a long time ago a vicious cycle began in the advertising space where predatory ads had more incentive to pay for ad space, so sensible people start to perceive ads in general as predatory. Now no sensible advertiser that’s trying to promote a legitimate product for legitimate reasons will do so by buying ad space, thus reinforcing the increasingly accurate perception that all ads are predatory.
Still much better than C++ templates, and I say that as someone who used to genuinely love C++ template metaprogramming. Admittedly Rust traits+generics are far more limited than C++ templates, but very often I find that to be a positive. The list of things that I feel traits+generics are missing is small and rapidly shrinking.
A good enough compiler would prevent them from happening 🦀
Sorry to be pedantic but Rust only guarantees no data races can happen. It does not prevent race conditions more generally.
Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely love the language for sparing me from the hell that is data races, but the language alone won’t solve race conditions for you.
I use thread sanitizer and address sanitizer in my CI, and they have certainly helped in some cases, but they don’t catch everything. In fact it’s the cases that they miss which are by far the most subtle instances of undefined behavior of all.
They also slow down execution so severely that I can’t use them when trying to recreate issues that occur in production.
I’m not sure if you’re genuinely asking what a test suite is or if this is a sarcistic joke about how no one bothers to test their C++ code.
And even if you do get to use pure modern C++ you’ll still get burned by subtle cases of undefined behavior (e.g. you probably haven’t memorized every iterator invalidation rule for every container type) that force you to spend weeks debugging an inexplicable crash that happened in production but can only be recreated in 1/10000 runs of your test suite, but vanishes entirely if you compile in debug mode and try to use gdb.
And don’t even get me started on multi-threading and concurrency.
There’s a difference between “You have to decide when to synchronize your state” and “If you make any very small mistake that appears to be perfectly fine in the absence of extremely rigorous scrutiny then this code block will cause a crash or some other incomprehensible undefined behavior 1/10000 times that it gets run, leaving you with no indication of what went wrong or where the problem is.”
I’m not saying you can’t do multi-threading or concurrency in C++. The problem is that it’s far too easy to get data races or deadlocks by making subtle syntactical mistakes that the compiler doesn’t catch. pthreads does nothing to help with that.
If you don’t need to share any data across threads then sure, everything is easy, but I’ve never seen such a simple use case in my entire professional career.
All these people talking about “C++ is easy, just don’t use pointers!” must be writing the easiest applications of all time and also producing code that’s so inefficient they’d probably get performance gains by switching to Python.
Your graph also cuts out early. Eventually you want to get performance gains with multi-threading and concurrency, and then the line drops all the way into hell.
deleted by creator
You have a talent for metaphor.
Using visual studio code this only happens if the library has thorough type annotation. While that’s becoming more popular, it’s not enforced at the language level so lots of libraries have enormous gaps in the autocomplete.
It only took me ~2 weeks of playing with Rust before it became my scripting language of choice over Python (which I had been using casually for ~5 years by that point).
The initial setup for Rust can be whipped up with $ cargo init
. You’re right that there’s more setup boilerplate because of the mandatory Cargo.toml
and directory structure, but cargo init
will provide all that in a snap.
As for the domain specific boilerplate, I actually find that Rust is better at that than Python in almost all cases. I feel that Rust’s clap
is much simpler, more reliable, and less boilerplate than Python’s argparse. Python might win in cases where there’s a very mature domain specific package that you need which isn’t available in the Rust ecosystem, but that’s becoming rare as crates.io grows.
And then when it comes to the actual “scripting”, very often my IDE’s intellisense can practically fill in the Rust code for me. One keystroke per word and it knows what function I want, or I can quickly scroll through the recommendations until I find what I’m looking for. Meanwhile with Python I always have to consult docs to find any API that isn’t part of the basic standard library. As a result I’ll often get the scripting done faster in Rust than in Python.
It does absolutely take some time to reach that point, though. Most programmers will definitely feel significant discomfort with Rust initially, but that’s just because you need to deprogram your brain from the bad habits that other languages encourage. There’s a tipping point in that deprogramming where all the other languages start to feel uncomfortable because you know it won’t let you write as good quality of code as Rust would.
Personally I think the “compiling Rust is slow” narrative comes from comparing it against scripting languages like Python. If you compare compiling Rust against compiling C++ code of similar complexity, I think Rust will come out very favorably since C++ templates and headers tend to carry a huge compilation burden.
I’m not convinced he really believes that OpenAI is going to roll out AGI in the next ten years, but I’m completely sure he’s determined that it’s a good marketing strategy to make people believe that he believes it.