Comments by "" (@diadetediotedio6918) on "ThePrimeagen"
channel.
-
90
-
6
-
@pedrolucasdeoliveiralara8199
Lol, if your question is that rust does'nt solve problems the average programmers face then you should not recommend C/C++ either because for most programmers this will just be harmfull, C++ is a huge mess of features and information and C is almost low-level as it should be, the "average programmer" in this sense should stick only to languages like C#, Python, Ruby, Java, Kotlin, Julia and things like that.
But this also is fake, because using Rust is a pleasuring experience and people can actually do hobbie projects in the language, so your point is just misguided. Also, using a language like Rust can improve the way people think on the architeture of programs, so it is surely worth learning.
4
-
3
-
1
-
@pedrolucasdeoliveiralara8199
Sorry for the delay, I ended up forgetting to answer and I only remembered today. That said, let's go.
1. Yes, C is a great language to learn the basics of programming and the way computers deal with pointers and the like, assembly is also a good way to get into the more intimate aspects of computers, especially if you're dealing with microcontrollers.
2. (a) Your statement is false, simply completely false. I used high-level languages in my career for most of my life and my long years in the profession. And I can definitely say that Rust is an excellent and nice language even in the face of high level languages like C#, Kotlin or Java. Having used almost literally all of them, I was able to observe how they are all suited for each type of service, in that sense you are simply wrong.
(b) Next, Go does not have the same performance as Rust, I personally hate arguments that take into account performance, but in terms of it Rust is on par with C in several cases, and in most of the existing benchmarks it surpasses Go. Now, I must say again that this is irrelevant to me and the 99.9% of cases people will need it.
(c) Rust will help you understand the architecture of programs in the sense that the compiler will enforce strict and well-defined rules about memory usage, when using Rust the average programmer will have contact with concepts which he would only have in very specific cases by following bad coding standards in other languages, you will learn the basics of message passing and because of the borrow-checker and immutability by default you will learn the benefits of using it. These concepts are part of what we conceive as "architecture" in software, the way in which projects are structured.
(d) I don't understand your point about "smart pointers", Rust by default doesn't use them, the borrow-checker does this process at compile time, but they can be used in cases where the memory property needs to survive longer than the standard. However, I never said that Rust would teach anyone about "memory management", I'm just replying because it piqued my interest.
3. (a) I believe I just refuted your claims by saying that I found Rust to be an excellent language after using almost literally every other language, and I'm being honest, I've used Lisp, C#, Clojure, Java, Kotlin, Lua, JavaScript , TypeScript, PHP, C and even a bit of C++ over the years, there's the right tool for every job, and I can perfectly see how Rust fits into the most diverse development cycles.
(b) I can grant the point that Rust is especially useful when you're dealing with low-level languages like C/C++, because it simplifies and secures many otherwise more complex processes in them, but I can also see it being used for higher-level purposes, in more or less specific cases (this is literally embedded in the language, it is meant to be both high-level and low-level). Rust is great for making the structure of a program behave predictably (due to its error handling), it is great for preventing common mistakes with concurrency (the borrow-checker is able to eliminate data races), and it is also great for when you need to design a system with low latency. It definitely has its value and even C# designers are seizing on some of its concepts to improve the shape of the language in some areas.
(c) Finally, I don't know where you got the idea that Rust is one of the hardest languages to understand, that's a rather strange statement. The only things difficult to understand in Rust are the coding standards that are imposed by the language, such as the notion of keeping things immutable by default and the data ownership structure imposed by the borrow-checker, when understanding the most basic concepts of Rust language and understanding how programs are structured in it, anyone should be able to produce something. My experience learning the language was incredibly enjoyable overall.
Addendum, I'm not saying that Rust is always the right tool for the job, if you can do the same task more simply with Go than you can with Rust, you're probably better off using Go, but there's no point in saying Rust is not worth learning. Learning a new language and understanding its concepts increases your own understanding of other languages and gives you access to ways of thinking that could previously be unknown, in this sense it makes absolutely every sense in the world that, if you have the time, availability and desire, learn Rust.
1
-
1