Image working in an old building, there is no coffee machine, there is no warm water and if you want to do something new, chances of you getting in trouble because you forgot to mess with CMake or free memory, are high.
But the building works since it has been tested for 30 years.
Rust is a new building that you can move over to, there is a coffee machine that is a bit complicated at first but once you understand it it is that bad, there is warm water and you don’t have to mess with CMake or allocate/free memory for everything.
But the building is new, there will be issues here and there and sometimes the promised warm water wont work since someone fucked it up, but in general it is just sooooo much more comfy to work in.
Rust is not about making Programming languages fast or memory safe. If you truly want to do that, I recommend doing crack and writing in assembly.
It is about making programming easier without sacrificing speed.
OK, imagine youre in a new car and youre like hmm donuts are good. But you know that when flight was first discovered it was scary, then after all that scares you knew it was worth while running the distance. Sometimes you gotta know when to fold em.
Ok, valid, is sudo (in this case) actively developed? Hom much maintenance does it require?
All these analogies amount to what exactly? New == better?
I get the enthusiasm for new shiny thing, especially when the new tool is better. But why do we need something like sudo rewriten? How does it make lives easier?
There’s a saying: if it ain’t broke… I’m trying to figure how and why it’s broken and all I see just a selling pitch for the language.
The analogy is “this building is working and tested, but it something DOES break it’s a huge pain to fix it.” whereas in rust it would be relatively painless. I don’t know if that’s worth rewriting it in rust but if the rust fanatics want to do it then eh why not.
Well that’s a very valid argument. If cost and impact of an error is very high and a rewrite mitigates that, sure, why not rewrite it. But in this comment thread I had to offer this argument myself, I haven’t really seen it properly communicated.
It’s always — memory safety this, error handling that… These are good reasons to pick a language for a new project, but, god damn, it’s a stupid reason for a stable program rewrite (let’s say the program is mostly in maintenance mode: no major new features are planned; correct me if that’s not the case for sudo).
Image working in an old building, there is no coffee machine, there is no warm water and if you want to do something new, chances of you getting in trouble because you forgot to mess with CMake or free memory, are high. But the building works since it has been tested for 30 years.
Rust is a new building that you can move over to, there is a coffee machine that is a bit complicated at first but once you understand it it is that bad, there is warm water and you don’t have to mess with CMake or allocate/free memory for everything. But the building is new, there will be issues here and there and sometimes the promised warm water wont work since someone fucked it up, but in general it is just sooooo much more comfy to work in.
Rust is not about making Programming languages fast or memory safe. If you truly want to do that, I recommend doing crack and writing in assembly. It is about making programming easier without sacrificing speed.
I agree with you completely, but good god man, if you’re going to use a metaphor stick with it.
OK, imagine youre in a new car and youre like hmm donuts are good. But you know that when flight was first discovered it was scary, then after all that scares you knew it was worth while running the distance. Sometimes you gotta know when to fold em.
Ok, valid, is sudo (in this case) actively developed? Hom much maintenance does it require?
All these analogies amount to what exactly? New == better?
I get the enthusiasm for new shiny thing, especially when the new tool is better. But why do we need something like sudo rewriten? How does it make lives easier?
There’s a saying: if it ain’t broke… I’m trying to figure how and why it’s broken and all I see just a selling pitch for the language.
The analogy is “this building is working and tested, but it something DOES break it’s a huge pain to fix it.” whereas in rust it would be relatively painless. I don’t know if that’s worth rewriting it in rust but if the rust fanatics want to do it then eh why not.
Well that’s a very valid argument. If cost and impact of an error is very high and a rewrite mitigates that, sure, why not rewrite it. But in this comment thread I had to offer this argument myself, I haven’t really seen it properly communicated.
It’s always — memory safety this, error handling that… These are good reasons to pick a language for a new project, but, god damn, it’s a stupid reason for a stable program rewrite (let’s say the program is mostly in maintenance mode: no major new features are planned; correct me if that’s not the case for sudo).