It's honest. If we can serialize our ideas to any language for durability, Rust is the way to go.

It's not the best tool for the job for a lot of things, but if the LLMs make writing it as fast as anything else - whelp, I can't see any reason not to do it in Rust.

If you get any language outputs "for free", Rust is the way to go.

I've been using Claude to go ridiculously fast in Rust recently. In the pre-LLM years I wrote a lot of Rust, but it definitely was a slow to author language. Claude helps me produce it as fast as I can think. I spend most of my time reviewing the code and making small fixes and refactors. It's great.

I'll just stick with C as my lingua franca, and won't be involving Microsoft in my programming life, thanks.

are you implying that using Rust involves using MS products?

Who owns Claude again?

EDIT: Not who you think, apparently. lol.

Let me rephrase: who owns ALL of the "AI companies", along with everything else--every other big name you've ever heard of?

Feel free to keep shoveling all your data in their direction and using the tech they tell you to use. I'll sit this one out, thanks.

Anthropic? ChatGPT is the one affiliated with Microsoft.

You’re thinking of OpenAI and ChatGPT, which has a (now-rocky) partnership with Microsoft.

Claude is an Anthropic offering.

Not Microsoft.

> It's honest.

It's not, nor is it well informed. People are currently developing languages specifically for use by LLMs.

> It's not the best tool for the job for a lot of things

Then how could it possibly be the final language?

> if the LLMs make writing it as fast as anything else - whelp, I can't see any reason not to do it in Rust

This has nothing to do with the claim that it's the final language.

I read the op and couldn't stop laughing. Reminds me of those musk fanboi twerps. A tiny bit of logic and all their arguments unravel quickly.

What did I say that is false?

While Rust is excellent, you must acknowledge that Rust has issues with compilation time. It also has a steep learning curve (especially around lifetimes.) It's much too early to say Rust is the "final" language, especially since AI is driving a huge shift in thinking right now.

I used to think that I would never write C code again, but when I decided recently to build something that would run on ESP32 chips, I realized there wasn't any good reason for me to use Rust yet. ESP-IDF is built on C and I can write C code just fine. C compiles quickly, it's a very simple language on the surface, and as long as you minimize the use of dynamic memory allocation and other pitfalls, it's reliable.

If you're programming for ESP, then embassy is the way to go in most cases. You don't need to learn much about lifetimes in most of the application code. Steep learning curve people refer it is "thing blow up at compile time vs runtime." It's easy to write JS or C that passes all tests and compiles and then wonderful blows up when you start using it. It just forces you to learn things you need to know at IMO right now.

My biggest problem with rust right now is enormous target/ dirs.

> My biggest problem with rust right now is enormous target/ dirs.

We're working on that and it should get better soonish. We're working on shared caches, as well as pruning of old cached builds of dependencies that are unlikely to be reused in a future build.

thanks beejesus! (aka the devs) I'm tired of forcing shit into workspaces just to slightly mitigate these issues

I feel compilation time is unbearable in Rust, even on MacBook pro M3 max, don't get me started on space