Which is fair. The author also highlights an interesting problem: Some of us will opt to not use Rust, even when we should, simply because the language doesn't appeal to us.
I love the idea of Rust, but find the syntax to be just awful, and the entire thing just overly complex. I'm not saying that Rust isn't the way it is for good reasons, but the code is often hard to read. Some of the syntax choices are in my mind questionable and serves only to have Rust programmer appear smarter than the rest of us.
Rust shouldn't try to accommodate people like me, because it will make everything worse for everyone. Instead I should look elsewhere, may not to C, I'm not that clever, but to languages like Go, Nim, Crystal or Hare. It's important that we have choices, because even the best designed language, and I do consider Rust a well designed language, will fail to appeal to everyone.
The language is just an interface between humans and the machine to make it easier for us humans - machines aren't all the same so why should humans be?
"Some of us will opt to not use Rust, even when we should"
Nobody SHOULD use Rust.
Some may use it, but nobody should.
And because of this "should" many will not use it, especially when you consider that the language is conceptually overweight and there was already one "very popular" conceptually overweight Scala language, which now only the old people remember (laughs).
Seriously. The post should've just been the "Rust Isn’t Fun for Me" section. That's the reason, everything else is just rationalizing.
To be clear, I don't mean to disparage the author's decision. Programming can be an artistic endeavour, where personal enjoyment trumps most concerns. If programming C is what keeps you motivated, go ahead and use it! Just be aware that this may make your software risky to use and rejected in many real-world situations.
mrweasel|3 years ago
I love the idea of Rust, but find the syntax to be just awful, and the entire thing just overly complex. I'm not saying that Rust isn't the way it is for good reasons, but the code is often hard to read. Some of the syntax choices are in my mind questionable and serves only to have Rust programmer appear smarter than the rest of us.
Rust shouldn't try to accommodate people like me, because it will make everything worse for everyone. Instead I should look elsewhere, may not to C, I'm not that clever, but to languages like Go, Nim, Crystal or Hare. It's important that we have choices, because even the best designed language, and I do consider Rust a well designed language, will fail to appeal to everyone.
3836293648|3 years ago
Because very little of what people complain about is actually syntax and is actually semantics.
But closure syntax is awful
anta40|3 years ago
Overall, it feels like a nice combination of Pascal and Python. At least, reading Nim code is usually easier than Rust.
On the other side, I'm still interesting in learning Rust. There are some open source OS kernel projects written in it.
t43562|3 years ago
azubinski|3 years ago
Nobody SHOULD use Rust.
Some may use it, but nobody should.
And because of this "should" many will not use it, especially when you consider that the language is conceptually overweight and there was already one "very popular" conceptually overweight Scala language, which now only the old people remember (laughs).
bryal|3 years ago
To be clear, I don't mean to disparage the author's decision. Programming can be an artistic endeavour, where personal enjoyment trumps most concerns. If programming C is what keeps you motivated, go ahead and use it! Just be aware that this may make your software risky to use and rejected in many real-world situations.
rapsey|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]