Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pkolaczk 1021 days ago
> even if it's still very un-productive next to productivity-oriented languages (e.g. Python).

The thing is, for many people, including me, Rust is actually a more productive language than Python or other dynamic languages. Actually writing Python was an endless source of pain for me - this was the only language where my code did not initially work as expected more times than it did. Where in Rust it works fine from the first go in 99% of cases after it compiles, which is a huge productivity boost. And quite surprisingly, even writing the code in Rust was faster for me, due to more reliable autocomplete / inline docs features of my IDE.
2 comments
kelnos 1020 days ago
I think part of the problem is "developer productivity" is a poorly-defined term that means different things to different people.

To some, it means getting something minimal working and running as quickly as possible, accepting that there will be bugs, and that a comprehensive test suite will have to be written later to suss them all out.

To others (myself included), it means I don't mind so much if the first running version takes a bit longer, if that means the code is a bit more solid and probably has fewer bugs. And on top of that, I won't have to write anywhere near as many tests, because the type system and compiler will ensure that some kinds of bugs just can't happen (not all, but some!).

And I'm sure it means yet other things to other people!

link
throw10920 1020 days ago
> Python or other dynamic languages

I should have stated that I'm comparing Rust to typed Python (or TypeScript or typed Racket or whatever). Typed Python gives you a type system that's about a good as Rust's, and the same kinds of autocompletion and inline documentation that you would get with Rust, while also freeing you from the constraints of (1) being forced to type every variable in your program upfront, (2) being forced to manage memory, and (3) no interactive shell/REPL/Jupyter notebooks - Rust simply can't compete against that.

You're experience would likely have been very different if you were using typed Python.

link
kelnos 1020 days ago
> Typed Python gives you a type system that's about a good as Rust's

No, it absolutely does not.

Also consider that Python has a type system regardless of whether or not you use typing, and that type system does not change because you've put type annotations on your functions. It does allow you to validate quite a few more things before runtime, of course.

link