this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2024
377 points (92.7% liked)

Programmer Humor

19276 readers
2820 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because they just have their own brain chemistry as the basis of it whereas the above comment clearly states:

Rust has proven empirically that the tradeoff between performance and safety doesn't need to exist.

Which is truth. And it's much easier to base a coherent argument on truth rather than vibes.

Eh, technical merit is only one of many factors that determine what language is the "best". Best is inherently a subjective assessment. Rust's safety and performance is the conceptual bible rustacians use to justify thier faith.

I also know religious people who have written books about their faith too (my uncle is a preacher and my ex-spouse was getting their doctorate in theology). Rust has the same reality-blind, proselytizing zealots.

The needs of the project being planning and the technical abilities of the developers building it are more important that what language is superior.

I like rust. I own a physical copy of the book and donated money to the rust foundation. I have written a few utilities and programs in rust. The runtime performance and safety is paid for in dev time. I would argue that for most software projects, especially small ones, Rust adds too much complexity for maintainability and ease of development.