it feels like there’s a smaller language hiding in Rust that’s half as powerful at the edges but 10-50x easier to read, write, and maintain
13
18
123
Conversation
Comparing a language using garbage collection to one tackling the hard problem of providing memory safety without it doesn't make much sense. Rust is a low-level systems programming language while Go is in a different niche. If you don't need a low-level language, don't use Rust.
2
1
5
I agree with everything you said except "don't use rust" part.
1
"If you don't need a low-level language, don't use Rust." is far different than saying "don't use Rust". If you need a low-level language, use Rust. If you don't, use a high-level language offering more productivity, less friction and quicker development turnaround times.
2
I did not misinterpret your sentence, I just shorten mine. Anyway, Rust can be used in more places than just low-level.
1
It can be used, but that doesn't make it a good fit for it with productivity comparable to a high-level language with garbage collection and without many of the concerns fundamental to the design space of Rust is aimed at. It does Rust a disservice to have it presented as that.
Rust is more high-level than JavaScript, and its type system is better designed than TypeScript. There's many more features that Rust provides than simply safety and performance.
1
"Rust is more high-level than JavaScript"
That's nonsense, and I also don't understand why you're bringing up JavaScript. No one was talking about JavaScript or claiming that it's a well designed language or a good fit for general purpose usage, and the same goes for TypeScript.
1
1
Show replies