Hacker News Reader

Comment by lucidguppy | Hacker News Reader

http://scihi.org/frederick-great-potato/

To increase rust adoption you need to cultivate FOMO - create an aura of "rust is a secret weapon", which it is in certain cases (safety critical performant code).

Rust isn't really meant for prototypes. So don't expect Rust adoption to be in the range of Python or JS/TS. Expect it to max out in C++/Java adoption.

It needs a champion web framework like django, rails, or phoenix. Don't give adopters an overabundance of choice, or they'll recoil.

It already has a better packager than most languages.

If Rust shows that its 10x better than Java and C++ in terms of productivity - it will have no problem getting adoption. Just need more promotion on how much easier it is to work with than C++

View on HN

I’ve been writing rust full time for the last 2 years, and I’m going to make a bold prediction: I don’t think rust will displace Java at all.

Rust is a gorgeous language and I love it, but it optimizes for making good binaries over being easy to learn and use. Java shops don’t use Java because it’s clever, clean or fast. They use Java because it’s a known quantity, it works, it’ll outlive everyone and it’s easy to hire for. Java is popular precisely because it’s not new or shiny. Because there isn’t a new framework every week that you need to learn to stay on top of things. Java is a language for late adopters, who said no to Scala, Clojure and Kotlin. Why would they switch to rust?

If rust displaces anything it’ll be systems languages - C and C++ in web browsers, databases, Linux, embedded systems and some video games. And safety critical systems like helicopter control systems. It remains to be seen if it makes any serious inroads in web services. I can still throw web services together in nodejs dozens of times faster than I can in rust.

Rust isn’t trying to be the world’s most productive language. Rust would rather complex syntax and fast binaries than simple syntax and slow binaries. So it’ll always be harder to learn than Go, Java, C# or Swift. I honestly think Swift - if it had rust’s tooling and ecosystem - is a better language for general purpose computing.

Rust is a lovely language, but like every other language, it’s no magic bullet. Add it to your toolbox, but don’t throw out your other tools.

Back in the mid-1990s, Java was the first type- and memory-safe language to be widely adopted in the enterprise. It was, in a sense, the Rust equivalent of its day when compared to the previous standard of C++. It may have been a lot slower and clunkier than C++ back then or Rust today but this mattered less in the 1990s when if anything, its unique cross-platform development story would've made it feasible to seamlessly deploy it on high-performance servers and midrange machines. Sure, today Java/C# are mostly adopted as a matter of convenience but this wasn't always the case.

Very good points - I agree. Kotlin and other Java++ languages would be their goto rather than rust.

I'll give another reason: the typical Java (and JS/Python/whatever) developer doesn't have the knowledge, dedication, and interest to learn it. And companies don't care about maximizing performance in most cases, they want good enough for cheap enough, and a decent Rust dev is going to cost more than a decent Java or .NET dev

Dedication and interest among developers will grow when compelling stuff starts to be written in Rust. Same as Java in the 1990s, .net, Python and Ruby in the 2000s or JS in the 2010s.

No, I'm saying the typical dev doesn't have any interest in learning anything new beyond what they already know, and some hot new thing in Rust isn't going to change that. The level of mental effort needed to learn Rust is greater than the typical dev is willing to expend on anything.

I'm an experienced Ruby web developer, and I'm starting to learn Rust. You mentioned Java and Nodejs, but I still wanted to chime in on the topic of languages in web development more generally, and the applicability of Rust to web development.

After tackling the refactoring of a complex Rails app that has a rules processing engine implemented on top of ActiveRecord, the true cost of Ruby's lack of static typing has become apparent to me. It's clear now that you can get a web app up and running quickly in a framework like Rails (as one example of a convenient, low-friction framework). But once you need to turn it inside out and make significant changes to the implementation, you're walking on egg shells and relying on previous devs to have built out good test coverage. A web app written in Rust would be easier to refactor in important ways at this point in the life of the app. It is clear there was a cost to using Ruby, but also that it was deferred.

We need better ABI standards (or any at all).

I do agree that Rust is prone into displacing C (and very simple C++, any C++ that needs the ++ part was already displaced by now), but I do think it will make inroads into plenty of places it shouldn't be. That's because the foundational tools will get written in it, and this leads people into consuming those tools in Rust code too, to avoid incompatibilities.

I thought Rust was to C++ what Scala was to Java. Which implies two communities which don't overlap much. I loved C++ 20 years ago but I'm not going back to manual memory management. I'd rather hold my nose and use golang if the JVM languages don't keep me employed anymore.

Rust is more like Kotlin compared to Scala. Except that C++ also has plenty of footguns, in addition to the accumulated complexity.

Totally agree. Java shops don't have the memory safety issue Rust solves. Without that benefit, why bother switching?

C++ and Java don't overlap much in the domains they're used in in my experience. Rust may totally replace C++, where the memory safety issue exists and high performance is critical.

> (Rust) champion web framework

As I've said before, Go is more appropriate than Rust for web back end work. The libraries are well debugged, because Google uses them internally. The "goroutine" approach gets rid of the thread/async problem. Garbage collection means not having to think too much about memory management.

Rust is harder. I write mostly in Rust (36,000 lines in the last two years) but for something hard, a high-performance metaverse client. It's overkill for your shopping cart.

(I suspect that the next generation of "champion web framework" will be something that you talk to in English and it generates routine web front and back ends. Probably as a service.)

I think Axum has the potential to be the top web framework. Not too high, not too low, very well designed and complete, and well maintained with healthy momentum. It has become our web framework for web services and web app backend.

Not sure we will ever see a "rails" like framework in Rust (for the better IMO)

Axum, Tonic, Serde, and Tower are extremely powerful together. They make building APIs so straight forward. I do wish we could add a few features for free, such as interning JSON strings (which you can do easily via a new library) but this set up is so pleasant to use that I believe it will stay for a long time.

I have recently written a service in Axum (our main API is written in Rocket), and absolutely LOVE it, especially the macro-free API. Next full backend project will be in Axum for sure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com