> Are you saying that Rust, a system programming language, can compete with the scripting languages in speed of developing features?!
I'll say it. At work, the backend is Rails, and I am a Rust contributor in my freetime. I am in the early stages of working on a framework for web apps in Rust & I believe it will be comparatively productive to Rails. Only your code will be faster and many bugs will be caught at compile time.
Yep. :) Different usecase from what I'm working on; helix is for embedding Rust inside of a Ruby program, my library is for writing an HTTP service in Rust; so it will sit on top of tokio + hyper.
(Given a modest test suite and checking parameters at external API interfaces, scripting languages didn't have much problems with bugs that could be found at compile time, imho.)
> (Given a modest test suite and checking parameters at external API interfaces, scripting languages didn't have much problems with bugs that could be found at compile time, imho.)
I've given JavaScript about six years to prove that tests make up for static analysis and all I've learned is that we need MORE static analysis.
I've met about four people in a dozen years that write better tests than me, and pretty much everyone else is writing garbage. And when I look back at my own I'm never satisfied.
Essentially the only thing worse than no tests is thinking you have test safety when you don't.
Particularly, negative tests in a dynamic language are easy to write but are virtually guaranteed to break at a later date without anyone noticing, because you are now looking in the wrong spot for a piece of data.
Coming from dynamic land, including JavaScript, one thing I noticed about rust's types and compile time safety was how it would probably eliminate 90% of the unit tests needed for an equivalent JavaScript program, essentially allowing the programmer to focus on less pendantic and more useful-looking unit tests.
"Bugs that can be founderstood at compile time" is a complicated category, since it depends on how much you lean on your compiler to help. For example, wrapping primitive types in semantic wrapper types can be an easy way to catch errors where you mix up parameters. And with a sufficiently powerful type system like Idris you can theoretically catch literally any possible bug at compile time.
I'll say it. At work, the backend is Rails, and I am a Rust contributor in my freetime. I am in the early stages of working on a framework for web apps in Rust & I believe it will be comparatively productive to Rails. Only your code will be faster and many bugs will be caught at compile time.