I have never done any Rust, but I love Volvo (I have driven 3 different Volvos) and I'd buy them without trying them (done it twice) if you want a car that is consistent and user-friendly, this is the one to go for.
Now I have a reason to try Rust.
Now I have a reason to try Rust.
Just a few warnings. Everybody when they start are “fighting with the borrow checker”. And some people are frustrated by it. But you have to see that it is a good thing. Because Rust is warning you about a whole type of bug that your old way of doing things were actually creating this kind of bug. And now rust can catch them! It’s like a guy the frustration of someone coming from a dynamic language to a typed language and being frustrated because he has a type number but now he wants it to be a string. Sure you can do that in a dynamic language but it can created all kind of bug.
And another point. Remember what the language is made for and also not made for. Yes you are going to be faster in X language for different things. But for what Rust is good at, the power it gives you, the dev experience, and the performance are amazing.
I usually would grab Typescript first for the back and then reach to Rust where speed and security safety is critical. And it’s so good to code in it.
Have fun!
As an experienced C programmer learning Rust, my frustration is less "oh it prevented a bug I would have made" and more "no but its fine in this context leave me alone" :-)
There is this belief "I know C so I know what's fast here", and, while that's sometimes true, I think it's wrong often enough re: Rust to try doing things a different way at a relatively high level. I think when you're starting off with Rust your goal should be to implement virtually everything in the dumbest/most obvious/Python-ic way possible, and then to experiment with optimization/rewrites. And while you should try the thing "You know to be fast because you know C" you should also spend that time reading how the std lib implemented a feature and leaning on the std lib, benchmarking as you go. One reason is because the paradigm is obviously different. Another is because the std lib has lots of features for common uses which are optimized very carefully, which C just doesn't have, and one shouldn't ignore/forget that.
That's a very overused argument and IMHO wrong way to sell Rust. The reality is, even if 100% of C bugs were memory safety related, that still does not mean every C program is riddled with bugs. If that were the case, nobody would write C programs in the first place.
There is a strong selection bias in play here. You only see times where memory safety caused an issue because you get a segfault/overflow/etc but just have invisible correct behavior at all other places.
Maybe I was lucky with the people and companies I worked at, but memory safety overall has never been a big issue with our C softwares. Sure it happens from time to time, but it's definitely not any kind of plague.
Still I'm learning Rust, so why?
For me, it has to do with the library ecosystem. It's very hard to find good quality, easily pluggable, performant C libraries. You always end up having to re implement half of the data structures you need, or use sub par configuration formats just because you don't have readily available libraries.
I think this is a much more compelling, and frankly true, argument for C programmers to use Rust.
Go look at the linux kernel. Arguably the most important C program on the planet. Absolutely enormous incentive to get it correct. It is... full of bugs. Including a large number of memory safety bugs.
Writing low-level systems code often that involves pointer arithmetic or type punning. The whole point of Rust is to be able to write such code with the iffy parts clearly delimited.
Yeah it was kind of unfortunate, and I think resolved by now?
As a saying goes (in some locations), “Now we probably can’t boil more soup from those bones”.
Not separate physical controls. No voice commands. Only the ability to tap on the touchscreen at least three times to change the A/C. It was a real bummer and soured me on the brand. It’s hard to believe they are safety focused with design decisions like that.
https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2022-us-vehi...