@@briansepolen4917 I'm not a fan of bread either

@@briansepolen4917 adoption

@@briansepolen4917 why trafficking? this is labour prices hahahahha

This is absoluely ridiculous. There's no way we can get 2 cows in $20

EuroTrip vibes

And why is that?

@@idan5323 Because 1) a proper relase mechanism does not only handle one specific ressource (memory) but can be applied to all 2) Determinism, You can say exactly when your ressources will be released. This make real time applications possible and even for normal apps it often reduces the memory footprint and avoids gc stutters.

@@vorrnth8734 Yea sure, but it does not mean that it is good for everything because it means more responsibility on the programmer.. How is that different from c++ where you can have serious disasters regarding to unreleased memory?

@@idan5323 First, in modern c++ it is quize difficult to produce such errors. The problem here ich c with classes legacy code. C++ and Rust solve the management problem with a concept called RAII. It basically means that your ressource is automatacilly releases wegen it goes out of scope. That enables deterministic behaviour.

@@vorrnth8734 well, it is still depends on correct implementation (means the developer can screw up) and is good only for situations where performence is critical or resources are limited. For all the other use cases, I just can't see how it is better than a modern GC

Thank you for the kind words Nathaniel!

Not sure where you're coming from, since Rust has been considered the most loved programming language, according to Stack Overflow, over the last years. If you're talking about overall adoption, of course it's not extremely popular, it's a new language, its ecosystem is still evolving. Same thing with Golang, everyone seems to love it, but it's still not widespread. Give it time, and these will come close, and probably overcome other popular languages!

harbi bu aralar temiz konusan birisi bulmak cok zor

Very clear to native speakers too

​@@bera2856 Ah! Turkish. Another language I'm starting to learn.

I know this was six months ago, but I was under the impression that Linux developers were using Rust to extend the OS itself. I would assume that the kernel logically supports it, then.

@@carlosmspk What I meant is the ongoing effort by Miguel Ojeda to add add the ability to write kernel modules in Rust into the mainline kernel.

@@hermannpaschulke1583 I confess, I'm out of my depth here, I know what the kernel is, but that's about it. Have never written any kernel code, and I'm only slightly aware of Linux pipes and task scheduling, that's about it! ^^'

​@@carlosmspk the naming is confusing, but Linux (also called "GNU/Linux" by FSF supporters) is made up of the Linux kernel (called just "Linux" by FSF supporters) and other userland software that is essential to what people call the "feel" of GNU/Linux. (In this comment, I'm using "GNU/Linux" for the whole OS and "Linux" for the kernel.) For instance, GNU Bash is not part of Linux (the kernel). Other software found in a desktop GNU/Linux distro typically include a desktop environment such as KDE or GNOME, a package manager, a Web browser, and so on. Linux (the kernel) interfaces with userland programs using syscalls, which are effectively programming-language independent. The x86 assembly is the one that performs the syscalls. However, the most common interface to Linux from userland is the C library installed on your system, which, on systems running Linux (the kernel), is most commonly the GNU C library (glibc). This ensures that programs are portable between different OSes, because now the same (or similar) C code can dynamically link with the C library. This is what Rust usually does: it compiles down and then links with your system's C library at runtime. Hopefully this wasn't too confusing? Edit: I realized I missed a part of the explanation, namely how Rust support works on Linux. This is months after the fact, but I figured I should include it for anyone reading. Linux doesn't have a standard C library (that'd be far too bloated), so it provides an extremely minimal set (or versions) of routines from it such as printk (a kernel-mode printf). It also has various helper routines for interfacing with hardware and userland and all the good stuff that a kernel does. Rust support in Linux basically consists of wrapping these unsafe C routines inside of Rust's safety mechanisms and making them easily importable out of the box.

@@NateROCKS112 I'm not the person you replied to but just wanted to say your explanation makes a lot of sense, so thank you for that!

Yup. While Rust personally hits pretty much everything I want from a programming language, time to MVP is the single biggest drawback to Rust. Time to completion on the other hand is pretty good since it can catch many errors at compile time that other languages won't notice until runtime and only if a particular code path gets taken, so less time is spent on debugging.

It's not like Rust is going to slow you down. Most of the time is spent by the developer thinking, so having to type a few more words ultimately doesn't matter. Yeah, fighting the borrow checker seems to take forever when newly starting, but it will go away.

@@shambhav9534 Indeed, but pick right tool for the job. We don't have to use Rust for everything, as any other languages.

@@xavhow It is important to look at what tools the language has as well. That's the main reason why you might change your language, not only because of some dogmatic "this language is better for this".

I'm in clg should I learn it

It has been in the linux kernel

@@ignacewinfield1439 yes, but not for general use.

I have built a Genetic Algorithm with rust...and before with vb.net and c#. What I can said, the algo run very fast with rust. The lang is very efficient in my opinion.

I implemented the NEAT Evo Algorithm in Rust. Was a lot of fun!

I have followed a guide to make a basic neural network, and it was a good experience even if I don't know a lot about neural networks

Autograd presents a really nice API for machine learning in Rust although unfortunately it uses the CPU for everything.

Would love to contribute to that project - just having less and less time after work, and barely have any time left to contribute to anything unfortunately :(

You may change your opinion on how easy Rust is once you have to deal with ownership and references in real applications ;-) Even the language itself is much more complex than Java, which is pretty basic. Generics are not really comparable, since they are not dynamic in Rust. So the compiler knows what they are and generates the code accordingly, whereas Java unboxes because of the problem you mentioned, and shares the same code. Each has its pros and cons.

@@phenanrithe "Generics are not really comparable, since they are not dynamic in Rust." Just want to say that both kinds of dispatch are supported for traits; static and dynamic. The static ones are monomorphized, while the dynamic ones are type erased (which can be helpful depending on what you're doing).

@@megumin4625 What I meant is that Java suffers from the type erasure problem, and thus cannot guarantee run-time safety (that's what the OP was referring to). Rust monomorphizes the generics indeed, so that can't happen. It's only static, the traits are something else and I wouldn't call that "type erasure" but dynamic binding through vtables. There is no notion of type there, it's only methods. Unless I misunderstood what you meant.

@@phenanrithe Don't know too much about Java honestly and its problems honestly. :D But yeah, Java for sure has a lot of serious problems. Yeah, generics are always static. I'm not really commenting anything about Java since that's not my area; I was just trying to make sure any reader of the comments is also aware that in addition to generics (which are statically dispatched), dynamic dispatch (trait objects) also exist (of course, obviously there's no problems with it).

Same problem here. If C++ is meant for front end then so should Rust be. I really like Rust but the lack of GUI libraries like JUCE, WxWidgets, etc means I will prefer C++. It seems the creators of languages like D and Rust just aren't interested in making sure GUI libraries are there. I think that hurts the uptake on those languages. At least when talking about desktop apps.

I wouldn't use a systems programming language for test automation. I would use use a high level language (Python, JS) instead.

😆😆, why so ?

@@josephxavier8636 he said 20usd gets you cows and one baby in Ukraine 😂😂

@@nathanielwoodbury2692 well that's funny😆

if its okay can you give some resources to learn to make a simple language

I'm thinking of rewriting my language compiler in Rust as well. Problem is, I don't know if it's gonna be worth it in the end.

@@soft384 I hear crafting interpreters is a pretty good book.

@@Nexus-rt1bm Thanks, I'll check it out.

Ooo, making an interpreter for LOLCode is on my project list. I was thinking of doing it in Python (interpreter inception?!) , but now I'm thinking Rust would be the better choice

@@jerryq27 it's really easy to parse stuff in rust too

@@jawad9757 I'm reading through the Rust Language book from their site. Any recommended resources for interpreter guides / design patterns? I'm asking cause your comment says it's relatively easy, but I wouldn't even know where to begin with making one! 😂

I'm doing this right now and I like it a lot, but I'm unsure as to how to return multiple types of primitives from my parsing functions.

Yes, but for "Unity like", not any time soon! We are a long ways away from that. But you can create games with Rust for sure. A lot of the tools have been developed. We are now at the phase where game engines are getting build. Just search for "are we game yet" and you will find a page with info about this. Also check out "Rust Bevy", still WIP, but getting better every update. (Also look up "Tantan" on TY, he makes videos about rust game dev)

You could make your own game engine if you're into that. There is good support for opengl and vulkan afaik.

rust has the capability to do that, for sure, but nobody has made such a unity-like game engine yet, so you'll be coding without a GUI editor. that is actually preferable in some ways, but it certainly isn't as easy to get into, so just weigh up what you want: if you want to make a game quickly, use unity, but if you're not afraid to learn some lower level stuff and like rust, then it's a fine choice

You must embrace change my friend

@@letsgetrusty wise words from a wise man

Microsoft actually makes and maintains there own rust bindings for a lot if winapi stuff. I would look in there github repo.

Lol ok 👍🏽 just got to that

I think I disagree here a bit. The issue is that most people never actually get far enough into learning to program to become proficient so if you start out on a harder language the odds of you quitting are much higher. If you start with something easy then at least you can understand programming concepts and troubleshooting, which transfers over to any language.

​@@ragreenburg Yes we disagree. It is not correct that programming concepts used in an "easy" language transfer to "any language", including to Rust. Many concepts in OOP languages like Python, Swift, JavaScript, Java, C#, etc. are not supported in Rust. And of course, Rust does things differently that "easy" languages. Given that it is totally possible for an absolute beginner to learn programming concepts using the Rust languages itself, It is just doesn't make sense to require beginners to learn other languages, then throw it away all that learning to be Rust programmers. For example, Rust does not support class inheritance, so it is stupid to force people to learn a language that does first (like Python, Java, Swift, Javascript, etc.), only to unlearn it when you move to Rust. And it is stupid to have people to learn an untyped language (like Python or Javascript) because it is easy, then have them forget all that to learn how it is done in Rust. Swift is a great "beginner's language" but Swift broadly categorizes types into "value" and "reference" types, hiding most of the implementation details of references from the programmer. Rust makes references a first-class type and opens the entire type system up for the programmer, for better or worse. That is a lot for a Swift programmer to unlearn so that they can do it the Rust way. One of the very reasons some people think of Rust as a hard language is because it requires experienced programmers to UNLEARN how they did things in other languages. Had they learned Rust to begin with, those concepts would have been easier for them. If a person wants to become a Rust programmer, it is completely possible to teach absolute beginners to Rust using only the Rust language. My first language was C, and many universities teach Java as a first language. Rust can't be worse than C and Java as a first language! Again, if you are sure you want to spend your career in Rust, then it really is better (and totally doable) to teach absolute beginners to program using Rust itself.

@@zurvey I agree with a lot of the things you are saying. And by concepts I'm talking fundamentals like loops, functions, statements, libraries, etc. I just think this is like someone trying to start running and having them train for a marathon first thing. More than likely they will quit before realizing how fun it can be. There's also decades of scientific studies showing that. So while the person who starts on Rust will probably be a better Rust programmer, they are less likely to actually become a Rust programmer because they are much more likely to quit.