5C5C5C @ 5C5C5C @programming.dev

Posts

0

Comments

245

Joined

2 yr. ago

If you think prices will be high without the use of fossil fuels, oooh boy just wait for the coming climate collapse that will obliterate all modern agriculture, create billions of climate refugees, decimate human civilization as we know it, and end all global supply chains.

Here's an educational visual.

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.

I agree with this, the theory doesn't track very well unless the executives locked themselves into expensive long term leases for their offices and don't want to feel embarrassed that it's a wasted cost.

I think the more likely explanation is that the companies want to drive people into quitting so they can reduce payroll without being on the hook for unemployment insurance.

I want this for when climate collapse destroys modern civilization and the survivors are left to rebuild society without the benefit of global supply chains or information infrastructure.

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.