[andrewxdiamond]

> I also like to make things in Rust

Seems like a good enough reason to use it to me, but perhaps I’m just another cult member.

> we use Rust in production because we thought it would be easier (well safer) to teach to interpreted language OOP developers than c/c++

I think rust is just safer period, regardless of your level of expertise or background. Or are you saying that every memory safety bug was written in by someone inexperienced?

Not to mention the concept of “sharing code.” See I may write garbage tier rust code that basically glues together a bunch of libraries, many of those libraries are written by programmers way better than me, and I can gain performance and safety from using their work. The performance difference between languages like Rust and JS is huge, even if I, tainted by my background in Java, write dogshit code.

[kelnos]

> I think rust is just safer period, regardless of your level of expertise or background. Or are you saying that every memory safety bug was written in by someone inexperienced?

I think you're reading too much into that and creating conflict where there isn't any. GP just meant that they had a bunch of interpreted language OOP developers (probably Java or C# or something like that), and they wanted them to start writing code in an AOT-compiled language (yes, I know about Graal native image; not the point). And that teaching them Rust is probably going to result in safer code than if they were to teach them C or C++.

That shouldn't be a controversial statement.

[a57721]

> GP just meant that they had a bunch of interpreted language OOP developers (probably Java or C# or something like that), and they wanted them to start writing code in an AOT-compiled language (yes, I know about Graal native image; not the point).

JIT vs. AOT is not the same as being an interpreted language. For most applications, running on top of the virtual machine is a good thing, I don't see JVM developers turning to different languages just to escape the JVM, outside of some niche projects.

[bigiain]

Also, without claiming that experienced c/c++ developers never write memory safety bugs, I don't think it's at all controversial to say inexperienced c/c++ developers write a lot of them (and hopefully experienced ones write way fewer).

[Fulgen]

(Also not the point, C# can be AOT-compiled as well these days)

[devjab]

> Seems like a good enough reason to use it to me

I was trying to out that wanting to take the easiest path was rather contradictory to working with Rust.

> I think rust is just safer period, regardless of your level of expertise or background.

Yes, I’m not sure how you think I was implying something different. We (specifically) adopted it because it was easier for our (specifically) developers who weren’t familiar with low level languages to work with compared to c/c++.

> many of those libraries are written by programmers way better than me

You shouldn’t sell yourself so short in my opinion.