Originally posted by mdedetrich
View Post
On the topic of Rust: Rust is definitely filling a needed gap and is a better alternative to C and C++ in many projects. The problem I have is more with fanboys than with Rust. Fanboys who want to see Rust universally everywhere, evangelizing Rust is the perfect fit for everything, for all libraries, for all applications, for all use-cases, for servers and for the desktop, for the kernel, for drivers, for the web, for microcontrollers, for all markets and for all industry sectors. Nope. I will go as far as to say Rust is the better alternative to C and C++ for the larger part / majority of codebases, but not for everything, not unconditionally and not always. Fanboys are being stupid and ignorant trying to preach or to "force" Rust onto areas for which it has not yet matured up to. This isn't always a problem of the language itself. Sometimes it is the language, sometimes it is its libraries, sometime it is tool support (and here I don't just mean compilers), sometimes it is the collective knowledge and/or expertise, sometimes it is interoperability, sometimes it is existing standards etc.. And frankly, anybody who ignores these factors is showing they have not yet had enough professional experience in some applicable areas and sectors, so they shouldn't be the ones downtalking others. Which is the reason I've taken the "audacity", oh my dear Rust Lords save me from my crimes, to speak my mind in a total of two forum threads in the past.
Comment