• 5C5C5C@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I get it there are people who want to play around and have language/compiler babysit them, but there are also people like me who want to see exactly what something is.

    This is a false dichotomy when it comes to Rust. Despite everything I said and despite Lucy’s complaint, there is nothing that actually stops someone from explicitly annotating the exact type when declaring a variable. It’s just not required by the language, and most developers eventually realize that it’s not actually useful.

    You’re right that these preferences are subjective, be although much of that subjectivity has more to do with how our past experiences have shaped what we’re familiar with, rather than any intrinsic characteristics of person. By that I mean, someone who uses Rust enough will most likely come to like the way the general community styles its code, sooner or later. In the meantime you’re welcome to do things in a way that suits your needs.

    The only thing that Rust’s type system is weak on is runtime reflection. There are ways to achieve it within Rust’s type system, but it’s considerably more work than what you get in Python and JavaScript. Imo the only reason to choose a language other than Rust for a greenfield project is if you have a strong need for runtime reflection all over the place and aren’t very concerned about performance, threading, or avoiding entire categories of bugs that the Rust compiler protects you from.

    • Shanmugha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      or that I don’t want to twist my brain with Rust way of things. But I agree with you on everything else :)