Post

Orual
@nonbinary.computer

the wild thing is that while there's good reasons to not use one language across your entire software stack from bare metal microcontrollers to web front-end, the one language you can do this with and have it not be an objectively stupid choice is probably rust.

Orual@nonbinary.computer

legit I use (micro)Python a fair bit for rapid prototyping on embedded, especially if I *know* for sure i am going to throw away the prototype or perf just does not matter one bit. if I think the prototype might become production I will often try and write it in rust.

Orual
@nonbinary.computer

reference counting is wonderful. Rust is not actually a hard language. There are some things it makes you think about, but if you want to write good code that runs fast and is reliable you should already be thinking about them.

0 reposts4 likes

Orual
@nonbinary.computer

None of the challenges in this were down to the Rust language. It was entirely maturity of the framework, the challenges of browsers, and someone not having done the grunt work already like they did in JS. Rust made it, if anything *easier*. weaver.sh/did:plc:yfvw...

weaver.shWriting a Web-based Editor from ScratchAt some point a while back I decided that I was going to write the front end of Weaver in Rust. I'd looked through the various 'fullstack' web application fr...
Orual
@nonbinary.computer

rust gives you plenty of ways to avoid having to fuss with lifetimes if you don't want to. and IMO lifetimes are about as easy as monads, and neither is nearly as hard as everyone else makes them out to be.

I am nameless yet others name me
@7778777.online

That's definitely 110% true, I'm an idiot and I learned how to use monads. Maybe it's just because I haven't practiced enough, but it definitely feels like the cognitive load of managing lifetimes scales linearly with the size of the project, though.

Orual
@nonbinary.computer

Yes and no. There's definitely some cognitive overhead, but there's also a lot of stuff that they make oddly clearer. I think a lot of the explanations people get of lifetimes are pretty bad (just like with monads) and that doesn't help matters. I need to maybe write what i'd consider a good one.

philpax
@philpax.me

I'll be honest, I didn't think I'd ever see anyone claim that Haskell is easier to adopt than Rust :berk:

philpax
@philpax.me

with that being said, lifetimes are pretty chill; you can always blast your way out of it with reference counting etc, it's largely something that you can opt into once you understand the basics of the model you can make them as local or as global you want

Orual
@nonbinary.computer

yeah i would definitely agree that haskell is lower tedium and less verbose than rust once you learn it. haskell is funky to read (in part bc i don't read it often) bc my reaction is so often "that's it? where's the rest of it?"