Comment by lynndotpy

Comment by lynndotpy 2 months ago

31 replies

Have you used Rust before? As a user, the speed and safety is nice. But as a developer, Rust projects are easier to hack on and contribute to.

That's kind of the whole appeal of Astral. I know Python better than Rust, but it's a lot easier for me to hack on Rust projects. The whole appeal of Astral is that they want to bring Rust-quality tooling to Python.

mdaniel 2 months ago

> but it's a lot easier for me to hack on Rust projects

That static typing is nice, I wonder if it's going to catch on one day.

The amount of energy spent trying to bend dynamically types languages into being real ones is just comical. Even the standard library is barely typed, so they give no fucks https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/v3.13.3/Lib/re/__init...

What does it accept? Who knows. What does it return? Don't worry about it

  • lynndotpy 2 months ago

    Static typing is a big one, but I've been so steeped in Python that I don't appreciate it as much as maybe I should.

    The big thing for me is that most Rust projects are statically(ish) compiled (like go) and only need a `cargo build`. No venvs or pip commands or node/npm/nvm or make, etc.

    • mdaniel 2 months ago

      Also, the Zen of Python is supposed to be one obvious way to do something but ddg "python dependency manager" and have a good laugh. That actually becomes triple lol for when uv steps in and says "uh, your pip requirements.txt is unsatisifyable, what are you even?!"

      And let me just say what an absolutely stellar job the rustc authors have done with the error messages. Just out of this world thoughtful. I have not yet gotten on board with their compile time vs safety and insight tradeoff, but I can see why they chose those two axes

      • misnome 2 months ago

        It’s not a rule. It’s a guide to being idiomatic.

        It’s like laughing at photographers for not using the “rule of thirds” sometimes.

      • ashf023 2 months ago

        "one obvious way to do something" describes almost none of Python. Easier said than done I guess, but I find Python particularly bad at it

    • johnisgood 2 months ago

      Yeah, and static typing is not limited to Rust, and there are many other programming languages that do not have any of that venvs / pip nonsense.

      • lynndotpy 2 months ago

        What languages? I'm asking this earnestly, because there are dozens of languages I can name but I have not used. Every language I've used (except maybe Julia) asks you also to install and use something extra, like "meson" or "ninja" or "maven" or "cmake", for its build phase.

  • mixmastamyk 2 months ago

    regex.match takes strings and returns a match object. There are most likely stubs, if you are new to it and need support.

    • mdaniel 2 months ago

      This response highlights both parts what I was saying: it's not just strings, and "I'm sure there's some extra things that the standard library wants you to duct tape together, good luck"

      • mixmastamyk 2 months ago

        It is exactly two strings that are required. The docs are there for flags etc, use them. Types were not entered directly into stdlib source for historical reasons.

        If you would enjoy further support, install stubs from typeshed.

  • BrawnyBadger53 2 months ago

    Hindly Milner type inference needs to catch on

    • mdaniel 2 months ago

      Type inference is handy, but as an observation source code is 90% written for humans - I believe that CPython knows what types they are, that's how TypeError even exists, but seeing "def doit(erthang):" doesn't help me in the slightest. Often PyCharm can figure it out, because bless their hearts, but then developers whine about "wwwaaa, pycharm too slo grug use ed" and then one gets AttributeError in production because who could have foreseen

      • Spivak 2 months ago

        Pyright being so fast has gotten my coworkers (as well as myself) who dare to code using tooling not made by JetBrains an easy to use instant-feedback type checker that can be used in CI. So I think it's a huge win.

      • dontlaugh 2 months ago

        IntelliJ sadly has slow UI, including bizarrely high typing latency. That is unrelated to analysis it does, which is acceptable to be slow.

faitswulff 2 months ago

> Rust projects are easier to hack on and contribute to.

This was actually the subject of a study at the University of Waterloo:

> We find that despite concerns about ease of use, first-time contributors to Rust projects are about 70 times less likely to introduce vulnerabilities than first-time contributors to C++ projects.

https://cypherpunks.ca/~iang/pubs/gradingcurve-secdev23.pdf

johnisgood 2 months ago

> Rust projects are easier to hack on and contribute to.

You can say that about any languages that you yourself know, or other people know. There are beautiful codebases in many other languages, and awful ones in the same languages.

If your Rust codebase has a lot of unwraps and lifetime annotations (among other things), I will probably not find it a joy to contribute to it, at all.

  • lynndotpy 2 months ago

    > You can say that about any languages that you yourself know, or other people know.

    No, I'm saying that Rust was easier to hack on and contribute to (on my own) when I had never written any Rust before. Rust (and almost Go) is the only language I can confidently say this about. It's not even in my top 5 strongest languages now, but I still stand by this.

    E.g. Look at the build instructions for Gimp and all its prerequisites: https://developer.gimp.org/core/setup/build/

    Very normal C++ project, ~500 words of instructions. Once I started thinking about using a chroot to fix dependency issues after I'd already built bebl and gegl, I gave up, because I ran out of free time. It didn't matter how much C++ I knew.

    Rust projects, comparatively, almost never demand that. It's almost always just `cargo build`, with some rare exceptions (e.g. The one exception I know of for which this is not true for is Graphite, which is a web app and also uses npm. )

    • johnisgood 2 months ago

      I do not know about Rust (because of all these lifetime and borrow checking stuff), but Go is definitely one of the languages one can easily contribute to without knowing much about the language, especially if you use VSCode with its Go extension.

      I do not like C++ projects, they are behemoths, slow to compile, and C++ continues getting so much bullshit bolted on top of the language. It is extremely complicated, at least for me.

      Most of my projects - regardless of language - has extremely simple build instructions, no matter how large it is.

      As for GIMP, "meson" and "ninja" is not too bad, I have come across projects with much worse build instructions, but I agree, it is leaning towards "complicated".

      > Once I started thinking about using a chroot to fix dependency issues after I'd already built bebl and gegl

      Been there, done that. I remember compiling GCC myself, it was not as straightforward as, say, LLVM + clang. I think the issue is not with the language itself, however, but the developers who do not simplify the build process.

rafram 2 months ago

Rust has very arcane syntax and a lot of rules that developers coming from interpreted / garbage-collected languages (like the ones using these tools) would have a hard time grasping. It’s easy for people who are already familiar with it, but isn’t that always the case?

  • lynndotpy 2 months ago

    I'm saying the opposite, actually. I found it easier to contribute to Rust projects (with zero hours Rust experience, and much Python/Java/C/C++/Ada) because Rust projects are significantly easier to build. (Just a `cargo build` in the default case.)

    • johnisgood 2 months ago

      It makes no sense to me. You found it easier to contribute to Rust projects because... Rust projects are significantly easier to build? What? You can just do "dune build" in OCaml, or run "make" for many C projects. Plus, it is also significantly slower to build Rust projects, you should have probably added that.

      • disgruntledphd2 2 months ago

        > run "make" for many C projects.

        This generally fails miserably, in my experience. It's normally a dance of error: libfoo missing, followed by install (which is generally only straightforward on linux), followed by libbar is missing etc.

        Don't get me wrong, I have built lots of non-trivial C projects, but it's not straighforward at all (maybe if you always work in C it's easier).

      • lynndotpy 2 months ago

        Yes, I meant the words I said. I haven't used OCaml, and some C projects are "just make" but that's not the rule like it is with Rust projects.

        The time I spend doing things is much more valuable than the time my computer spends doing things.

        I can only speak for why I like to know a project is written in Rust. I didn't add the build time because I didn't care.