RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programming language

Re:RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programmin... by carapace on Sunday February 04, 2018 @03:37PM (#16304770)

> Rust is a new systems programming language that promises to overcome the seemingly fundamental tradeoff between high-level safety guarantees and low-level control over resource management. Unfortunately, none of Rust’s safety claims have been formally proven, and there is good reason to question whether they actually hold.

Aw, c'mon!?

Rust is Sudoku for super-smarties.

- - - -

I'm going to "double-down" on that: Rust-lang is a toy, a beautiful bauble for minds addicted to a certain kind of complexity. Rust isn't about producing production code, Rust is about producing Rust. Scratching that itch.

My point is that I feel like the time and energy spent on Rust won't ever be justified in terms of productive bug-free software, when compared against some other simpler language (Hopgood's Noether comes to mind) or approach.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programmin... by quotheth on Sunday February 04, 2018 @04:57PM (#16305168)

I work for a company with a massive rust codebase. Rust is very much about building production code.

What is 'good production code' ?

* Few errors * Readable, well documented * Testable, has tests, has testing tools like quickcheck, fuzzing, etc * Meets performance constraints

Rust hits those better than any language I've used. The downside is, oh gosh, you'll have to actually learn a programming language that isn't just another variation of the ones you learned in school.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programmin... by carapace on Sunday February 04, 2018 @05:55PM (#16305450)

> I work for a company with a massive rust codebase. Rust is very much about building production code.

Okay, thank you, I feel a little better hearing that.

[ Parent | on HN ]