Hacker News Reader

Rust is a very different beast when it comes to development speed. When compromises must be made, its design decisions always favor runtime speed over developer friendliness. That results in rather unwieldy APIs compared to the alternatives in dynamic languages.

As a replacement for C/C++ this makes perfect sense, as a replacement of JS/Ruby/OCaml, not so much.

View on HN

Any particular examples of “development unfriendliness” in Rust?

I would also say safety/correctness usually win over runtime speed concerns if no other factors are involved as far as Rust design decisions go, at least that’s how it has typically been.

OCaml belongs with C++ and Rust for compile times...

How so? OCaml complies way faster and you don't actually need to compile it. You can sort of use it as scripting language without any compile step to begin with.

How so?

OCaml has bytecode + native code compiler, both much faster than heavy C++ templated code, or plain Rust code.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com