In my experience, basically all of them. Rust isn't that hard to learn on the job, it's maybe hard for some people to learn in isolation.
Obviously adding a new language requires understanding that there's going to need to be build system support, dev support, etc. I guess I assumed that was there? Unless Wiz is still in the 'wild west' phase where you can just do whatever you want.
I've learned Go in a day. Did the Go tour, and immediately felt comfortable writing it.
I've tried learning Rust multiple times, did tours, tutorials, even started reading the book - still don't feel comfortable writing it.
Rust is not a simple language. I say that, and my first language was C++.
Not guaranteed. Maybe it was that one guy who decided to introduce Rust to the codebase, then quit.
But I agree, generally, learning anything is easier when you have someone to ask.
I learn new languages all the time. I make it a personal goal to never let not knowing a language get in the way of what I do.
Rust was one of the easiest I've ever picked up. There is a ton of good information, examples, books, and tooling out there that helps me.
On the other hand I've had to pick up Go several times in the past. It's never stuck. Basically every project I have seen written in it is convoluted and just messed up to read and interact with.
People ALWAYS overstate the effort that Rust takes. There are a lot of spots that you can get messed up on. But not all of us are out here writing code that hits these things. People act like the existence of lifetimes means you have to write them everywhere and think about it. That's not the case for almost any of us.
I have to disagree with that. I've learned Rust but it was one of the most challenging languages I've picked up. Stuff like lifetimes are very difficult to learn on the job without already doing a lot of reading.
In that scenario I have never seen onboarding to the language be a problem.
> Just to clarify, you were learning Rust while employed
they did not say that, but you had to frame it that way to, again, claim that Rust is easy, like who cares.
I was responding to this:
> You now have Rust in your codebase. How many engineers on the team will be able to work on it? If you leave tomorrow will the code become a liability?
It's obviously relevant to that question.
> they did not say that,
I said that in my experience learning Rust at companies is easier than learning it in isolation.
They said that they had trouble.
I asked for clarification if they had trouble while learning in a work environment.
You jumped in to say that a work environment isn't relevant.
> like who cares.
Every other person in the thread who is discussing exactly that you absolute dunce
For you perhaps but it’s a pretty massive change in the longer term, though. You now have Rust in your codebase. How many engineers on the team will be able to work on it? If you leave tomorrow will the code become a liability?
With the numbers the author is providing it sounds very much like the problem could be solved in Node, even if it means using an unconventional programming style and there would be a smaller maintenance overhead than reaching for Rust.