this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
66 points (97.1% liked)

Rust

7596 readers
14 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BlackRoseAmongThorns@slrpnk.net 1 points 16 hours ago

As someone who's relatively new to rust, i feel that the slogan is pretty accurate, even when programming in other languages, i see that I'm way less prone to anti patterns and and write a better api for modules while barely thinking about it.

Mostly because i copy what design patterns work and are prevalent in rust's libraries and api.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 26 points 4 days ago

I like that I have to think in Rust before compiling, not after.

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social 13 points 4 days ago

A nice patena on aged metal !

[–] capuccino@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago (3 children)

...and not just for performance-heavy stuff or embedded development, but for shell scripts...

WHAT

[–] 5C5C5C@programming.dev 31 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Honestly yes. If I need to manipulate the filesystem or manage processes with any amount of conditional logic or looping, I'd much rather do it with Rust than shell scripts.

The only thing I use shell scripts for anymore is completely trivial sequences of commands.

As someone who uses a lot of shell scripts and learning Rust, do tell more.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 14 points 3 days ago

Yeah it's great for little scripts. There's even a cargo script feature that's being worked on so you can compile & run them using a shebang.

I'd use a shell script if it is literally just a list of commands with no control logic or piping. Anything more than that and you're pointing a loaded gun at your face, and should switch to a proper language, of which Rust is a great choice.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today -4 points 3 days ago

Kind of agree with you here.. I wouldnt reach for rust. Python gives much faster results than rust.

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world -3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It kinda feels like cheating for rust to publish a list of reasons why rust people like rust...

I like rust too, but this feels more like advertising than useful commentary on the language and its tools.

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Did you read the post? It ends with several critiques of Rust.

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

Honestly, I could not make myself read till that critique part. As much as I would like to hear what Rust actually is good for, that article is yet another cheap advertisement

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well, it really is. Went for Rust from Python and gained faster execution - wooow, no waaaay. No other language can do that (sarcasm, and to add more to it: did they ever try to actually optimise code first?)

[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The way to really optimize Python code, is by reducing the amount of Python code in your program, since Python itself is dog slow. Instead, you want to offload as much of the work as possible to modules written in compiled languages. So completely switching to Rust, or another compiled language, is simply taking that strategy to its logical conclusion

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Now that should be weighted against the amount of work the rewrite is, among other factors. But anyway the article does not give any specifics

[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's the case of for any optimization work, really

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Hence my question above