Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by miserable1980 3775 days ago
Given one of the OPs annoyances is the continuing churn in tech tools, please don't waste time with Rust. The premise of the language (safety) is seductive but it comes at the cost of complexity. I am an experienced dev that spent a month evaluating it and then decided life was too short. Frankly, it is easier for someone with a C background to work in C++ than it is with Rust. That's because you can use the simple features of C++ to get going and add on complexity as you learn more/need it. With Rust, you get thrown into the deep end right at the start with the complex borrow/ownership system. There is no proper book yet on Rust (some good online sources where I commend the people on effort ... but there is no K&R).

P.S. I used Go for some projects last year and found the situation to be much better. The Go book that's available on the website reminded me of K&R ... readable in a weekend of two. This should be the criteria for new programming languages IMHO.
2 comments
broodbucket 3775 days ago
As a lifelong C developer who recently had a lot of success starting a new project in Rust, I disagree. Writing "C" in C++ until you need extra features always turns out terribly. In Rust, you have to write code the Rust way from day 1. It takes 20 minutes of fighting with the compiler every time I implement a new feature in Rust, but when it compiles it does what it's supposed to do, the code looks good and there are no memory issues.

Don't even get me started on Go. Most overhyped language ever, with some serious issues.

link
steveklabnik 3775 days ago
What would a "K&R for Rust" look like to you, and how is the official book deficient in this way?

(I have my own grievances, which is why I'm working on a second revision, but feedback is helpful.)

link