The language itself is fine, from what I can tell. The main benefit to it is that it prevents a lot of memory overflow errors, which are often the access vectors in hacks. In a lot of languages, like C, it's possible that users can access data in memory they shouldn't have access to, if you're sloppy with your code. Rust prevents that at a low level.
The main problem is just that it's infested with troons.
I had high hopes for Zig also, but in their post when they gave their reasons for leaving GitHub for Codeberg, they mention ICE out of nowhere as yet one more reason why GitHub is evil.
The problem is, why does there need to be a language "community."
They're magnets for autists and troons (but I repeat myself), and more generally people who have time to waste being part of a community and NOT working.
The majority of "real" programmers with day jobs do their work but don't feel the need to consider themselves part of the "C++ community" or the "Python community" or to be a "Rustacean" or whatever.
Like all the "coders" who talk about their git commits and how many projects they work on, but their only commits are formatting changes and documentation.
In order to achieve this, it imposes a type system so strict that it needs an escape hatch (the "unsafe" keyword) just to be able to make the claim that you can write real code in it. Rust's guarantees do not apply to code in "unsafe" blocks.
But if you use unsafe too much, Rust has a cancel culture that will come down on you for it.
And if you don't use unsafe, you end up having to create convoluted code with insane type declarations just to conform to the Rust way of doing things, which is often radically different from normal code because the type and borrow checkers close off so many code patterns.
“Germany funds half a million for ArchLinux to write package manager in Rust.”
If you know the history of three letter agencies war on secure software and encryption, this would be a red flag and this is why Rust will be talked about oddly over the next couple months.
Only one compiler/large bytecode bloat(memory size of Hello World “memory overflow protected” vs C/C++)?
You don't understand the mentality of troons. They are failed men, autistic failed men. Think Chris chan.
Troons gravitate to anything niche that gives these faggots a sense of self-worth. Anything that makes them stand out and "DIFFERENT" from others is what makes people who are mods a very high chance of being a troon.
The reason why Rust attracts troons the same ay speedrunning attracts troons is because of the sheer amount of dedication you need to convince a bunch of people that your language is the "superior" language. If you say you use Rust, you give yourself a "fighting underdog" (victim complex) label.
That appeals directly to troons and their need to control the thoughts and actions of other people.
It's definitely possible in C to code in a way that makes memory overflow errors impossible. It's just that it often gets overlooked, probably due to project timelines or carelessness. The benefit to Rust is that it makes the entire situation impossible, vs. C where it's definitely possible to have coded well enough that memory overflows wouldn't happen but are you totally sure you coded well enough? I'm sure C is faster than Rust (though I'm not sure how much faster) and Rust does absolutely nothing to prevent a myriad other possible coding errors, so it's not like Rust is the end all be all.
As far as what attracted troons to Rust, I'm quite sure I have no idea. Never cared enough to research it, and I only tried learning the basics of the language when it became the new hot topic on all the software developer applications.
As far as what attracted troons to Rust, I'm quite sure I have no idea.
Primarily because Rust was developed at Mozilla after it was infested by troons. So they latched on to it early because it was their baby (even though it was actual talented non-troon computer scientists that made it).
But also because they gravitate to rules and authoritarian systems so the more rules and the less choices in the language the better for them. They're generally not very intelligent so they want the guardrails to not make stupid choices. Paint by numbers.
Another one like this is Google's Go language. Rob Pike was at least troon-adjacent himself, but it attracted more than a normal share of weirdos because it dictated source formatting and file organization and a bunch of other arbitrary decisions for no good reason. They love arbitrary rules.
I don't claim to be even close to proficient in Rust. It is not an easy or simple language, and very much rivals older versions of C++ and Java, in complexity. For those wanting to spend more time on important parts of their programs, where 95% is memory tedium, but they do want or need something lower level, for whatever reason, Rust gets genuine followers, for at least mostly living up to its basic promises.
It's much more that for the commies and troons, a fresh, growing, programming community represented an opportunity to get in, become maintainers, moderators, NGO go-betweens, etc.. The programming language was just another vehicle of subversion.
I was going to comment "Well, you start as a naked guy with a rock who tries to build a house, and someone with a gun shoots you for no reason. Play long enough, and you become the guy with the gun"
There's been a big gap, in languages, for decades. Those that do, put up with C-alikes, or C, and got on with things. Ivory tower libtards and troons made good ideas, with mathematical rigor, but could rarely get out of the towers.
You are not selling ML syntax, nor Haskell semantics, to normal programmers, full stop. But, there's a lot of waste in C and C++, in terms of necessary cognitive effort to do things that shouldn't need to be so hard, or intricate. But, most higher-level languages abstract away too much, and/or gave low or unpredictable performance.
Rust was thought up, at least its seeds, at just the right time and outside of the corporate or university world's. It brings functional programming semantics with it, but using more typical syntax, and let's you skip having to care about so many off-by-1 errors, keeping a safe stack, etc., but also let's you take the training wheels off, when needed.
It's got problems, as a language, some major (like a lack of defined stable ABI, and unsound type system), but it does things in the real world, from the fingers of normal programmers, that will look at you funny if you start talking about monads, that have been only in academic papers for the last few decades. Credit where credit is due.
However, it's community got taken over by lefties early on, and we're stuck with that. As a result, much of that infectious code, rewriting things that work well, already, tends to suck, and is mainly used as another way to get crazy leftists into gate kept communities that have previously been hard to crack, largely apolitical, meritocracies, on variations of arguments that C should not be the low level future, which most people would agree with (just that most attempts to replace it only deal with the surface level problems, or started out poorly, and never recovered, outside of niche cases - IE, Ada).
It is the first thing in like 60 years to be able to go toe to toe with fortran and C on benchmarks game(website to dedicated to benchmarking high performance coded programs against each other).
It has genuine advantages on those in terms of parallel programming ease and preventing buffer overruns.
But I think there are ulterior motives at play too, because it seems to be in concert with making those things move to MIT licenses from GPL, which allows for a takeover of the open source ecosystems.
I’ve messed with Rust. I can’t figure out the point. Every benefit is just “safety”. These people would apparently die if they ever had to deal with machine language and direct manipulation of memory. I guess if you’re working with a bunch of Indians they can only screw so much up in Rust?
Otherwise if you want low level I can’t see why to not use existing C/C++ and if you’re looking for simple scripting there’s things like Python.
So I guess it’s just to give some freaks a pet project. I could find better things to do than write yet another compiled language. Want something in the middle, Pascal has been around for 50+ years, but no we need something new for some reason.
The language itself is fine, from what I can tell. The main benefit to it is that it prevents a lot of memory overflow errors, which are often the access vectors in hacks. In a lot of languages, like C, it's possible that users can access data in memory they shouldn't have access to, if you're sloppy with your code. Rust prevents that at a low level.
The main problem is just that it's infested with troons.
Yes, it's a "she"-sausage fest, and the community is toxic.
I don't have issues with the language, it's quite interesting, and a good tool for some situations.
Now, I won't say that Python's community is better, just look at PSF, Drew Devault, and other exponents from it.
I'm fairly certain everything is pozzed at this point, but I've been following https://ziglang.org and haven't seen too much troon shit
I had high hopes for Zig also, but in their post when they gave their reasons for leaving GitHub for Codeberg, they mention ICE out of nowhere as yet one more reason why GitHub is evil.
https://archive.is/yeYIE#selection-169.0-171.21
Ah fuck.
Odinlang maybe.
I just block communities and don't pay attention to them. Where there's people there are issues.
The problem is, why does there need to be a language "community."
They're magnets for autists and troons (but I repeat myself), and more generally people who have time to waste being part of a community and NOT working.
The majority of "real" programmers with day jobs do their work but don't feel the need to consider themselves part of the "C++ community" or the "Python community" or to be a "Rustacean" or whatever.
Like all the "coders" who talk about their git commits and how many projects they work on, but their only commits are formatting changes and documentation.
In order to achieve this, it imposes a type system so strict that it needs an escape hatch (the "unsafe" keyword) just to be able to make the claim that you can write real code in it. Rust's guarantees do not apply to code in "unsafe" blocks.
But if you use unsafe too much, Rust has a cancel culture that will come down on you for it.
And if you don't use unsafe, you end up having to create convoluted code with insane type declarations just to conform to the Rust way of doing things, which is often radically different from normal code because the type and borrow checkers close off so many code patterns.
“Germany funds half a million for ArchLinux to write package manager in Rust.”
If you know the history of three letter agencies war on secure software and encryption, this would be a red flag and this is why Rust will be talked about oddly over the next couple months.
Only one compiler/large bytecode bloat(memory size of Hello World “memory overflow protected” vs C/C++)?
Jinkies, my glownigger sense is tingling.
The language is ugly as shit. It prevents memory errors until you get into "unsafe rust", which happens frequently and then ... what's the point?
You don't understand the mentality of troons. They are failed men, autistic failed men. Think Chris chan.
Troons gravitate to anything niche that gives these faggots a sense of self-worth. Anything that makes them stand out and "DIFFERENT" from others is what makes people who are mods a very high chance of being a troon.
The reason why Rust attracts troons the same ay speedrunning attracts troons is because of the sheer amount of dedication you need to convince a bunch of people that your language is the "superior" language. If you say you use Rust, you give yourself a "fighting underdog" (victim complex) label.
That appeals directly to troons and their need to control the thoughts and actions of other people.
It's definitely possible in C to code in a way that makes memory overflow errors impossible. It's just that it often gets overlooked, probably due to project timelines or carelessness. The benefit to Rust is that it makes the entire situation impossible, vs. C where it's definitely possible to have coded well enough that memory overflows wouldn't happen but are you totally sure you coded well enough? I'm sure C is faster than Rust (though I'm not sure how much faster) and Rust does absolutely nothing to prevent a myriad other possible coding errors, so it's not like Rust is the end all be all.
As far as what attracted troons to Rust, I'm quite sure I have no idea. Never cared enough to research it, and I only tried learning the basics of the language when it became the new hot topic on all the software developer applications.
Primarily because Rust was developed at Mozilla after it was infested by troons. So they latched on to it early because it was their baby (even though it was actual talented non-troon computer scientists that made it).
But also because they gravitate to rules and authoritarian systems so the more rules and the less choices in the language the better for them. They're generally not very intelligent so they want the guardrails to not make stupid choices. Paint by numbers.
Another one like this is Google's Go language. Rob Pike was at least troon-adjacent himself, but it attracted more than a normal share of weirdos because it dictated source formatting and file organization and a bunch of other arbitrary decisions for no good reason. They love arbitrary rules.
What makes you say that? I only know a little about him.
I don't claim to be even close to proficient in Rust. It is not an easy or simple language, and very much rivals older versions of C++ and Java, in complexity. For those wanting to spend more time on important parts of their programs, where 95% is memory tedium, but they do want or need something lower level, for whatever reason, Rust gets genuine followers, for at least mostly living up to its basic promises.
It's much more that for the commies and troons, a fresh, growing, programming community represented an opportunity to get in, become maintainers, moderators, NGO go-betweens, etc.. The programming language was just another vehicle of subversion.
Lol, I thought you meant the game at first. I always get them confused
I was going to comment "Well, you start as a naked guy with a rock who tries to build a house, and someone with a gun shoots you for no reason. Play long enough, and you become the guy with the gun"
It's extremely gay. That's pretty much it.
There's been a big gap, in languages, for decades. Those that do, put up with C-alikes, or C, and got on with things. Ivory tower libtards and troons made good ideas, with mathematical rigor, but could rarely get out of the towers.
You are not selling ML syntax, nor Haskell semantics, to normal programmers, full stop. But, there's a lot of waste in C and C++, in terms of necessary cognitive effort to do things that shouldn't need to be so hard, or intricate. But, most higher-level languages abstract away too much, and/or gave low or unpredictable performance.
Rust was thought up, at least its seeds, at just the right time and outside of the corporate or university world's. It brings functional programming semantics with it, but using more typical syntax, and let's you skip having to care about so many off-by-1 errors, keeping a safe stack, etc., but also let's you take the training wheels off, when needed.
It's got problems, as a language, some major (like a lack of defined stable ABI, and unsound type system), but it does things in the real world, from the fingers of normal programmers, that will look at you funny if you start talking about monads, that have been only in academic papers for the last few decades. Credit where credit is due.
However, it's community got taken over by lefties early on, and we're stuck with that. As a result, much of that infectious code, rewriting things that work well, already, tends to suck, and is mainly used as another way to get crazy leftists into gate kept communities that have previously been hard to crack, largely apolitical, meritocracies, on variations of arguments that C should not be the low level future, which most people would agree with (just that most attempts to replace it only deal with the surface level problems, or started out poorly, and never recovered, outside of niche cases - IE, Ada).
It is the first thing in like 60 years to be able to go toe to toe with fortran and C on benchmarks game(website to dedicated to benchmarking high performance coded programs against each other).
It has genuine advantages on those in terms of parallel programming ease and preventing buffer overruns.
But I think there are ulterior motives at play too, because it seems to be in concert with making those things move to MIT licenses from GPL, which allows for a takeover of the open source ecosystems.
I’ve messed with Rust. I can’t figure out the point. Every benefit is just “safety”. These people would apparently die if they ever had to deal with machine language and direct manipulation of memory. I guess if you’re working with a bunch of Indians they can only screw so much up in Rust?
Otherwise if you want low level I can’t see why to not use existing C/C++ and if you’re looking for simple scripting there’s things like Python.
So I guess it’s just to give some freaks a pet project. I could find better things to do than write yet another compiled language. Want something in the middle, Pascal has been around for 50+ years, but no we need something new for some reason.
It's a garbage language designed to fuck up open source projects. That's it.
Microsoft is pushing it to reduce competition.
So a bunch of undistinguished faggots who couldn't keep up in the modern world of programming cling to it as a means of seeming smarter than they are.
If Dave Portnoy was a programming language it'd be Rust.