To be fair it is pretty significant. Especially uv. I don't know anything about PHP's existing toolchain but I do know that Python's is a horrifying mess, and uv basically fixes it.

It's a small thing in the Rust community but it's pretty huge in the world simply because there are so many Python developers (and also because of the extreme magnitude of improvement). Probably wouldn't have happened without Rust.

▲

3eb7988a1663 3 days ago | parent [-]

Thanks to Rust, there are heaps of next generation CLI utilities that have come onto the scene in the past decade. Cross platform by default, UTF8 aware, more likely to be multi-threaded, simple distribution, and most importantly - improving on some unfortunate legacy API decisions.

Ripgrep, fd, tokei, Just, zellij, uv, and so forth. Porting languages has given the opportunity to remove some of the cruft decided on a whim in the 70s. None of these are world changing, but they do make life easier than the originals.

▲

johnisgood 3 days ago | parent [-]

Why is it "thanks to Rust"? They could have been written in any language.

▲

3eb7988a1663 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

To replace a historical C tool, you cannot compromise too much on the original constraints. Replacement has to be equivalently fast and no runtime. Which means even if you made a great design in C#/Java/Python/whatever, that is going to be a deal breaker for some. Safety is (somehow) not a compelling enough argument vs battle-tested.

Rust (or Go) are about the only popular languages around that can meet the spec. That Rust will always be theoretically more performant than GC Go makes it the more attractive option for re-imagining some of these bedrock utilities.

	▲	johnisgood 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		There are actually quite a few viable alternatives to Rust for building these fast toolchains, such as Zig, Odin, OxCaml, and Ada. Granted, not all of them are popular, but that is how Rust started off, too, right? --- Ada would have been great as it is quite mature and used for serious and critical software, but lacks the "cool factor" that Rust has. I would like to add, that there is clearly a disconnect between technical merit and adoption. Ada is a perfect example of this. It has been around since the 1980s with: * Stronger safety guarantees than Rust in many ways (stricter type system, built-in contracts, formal verification support) * Proven track record in safety-critical systems (aerospace, defense, medical devices) * Native compilation with no runtime overhead * Mature toolchain and decades of real-world deployment * ... and much more. If safety was truly the driving factor, Ada should have dominated systems programming decades ago. But it didn't, and that reveals what's really going on. I believe that Rust was chosen over Ada because of: * Timing - arrived when web developers were ready to try systems programming * Community building - excellent documentation, welcoming culture, modern package manager[1] * Aesthetic appeal - syntax familiar to C/Java/JavaScript developers * Marketing narrative - "systems programming without fear", i.e. fuckton of hype Ada had superior safety for decades but lacked the cultural momentum. It was associated with DoD contracts and enterprise software, not cool indie CLI tools. [1] Ada has Alire now as its modern package manager.

▲

Aeolos 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yet they were not - why is that?

	▲	johnisgood 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Why are you asking me back? I wonder why, too. Now, you can give me a reply for why you think that is, which you could have done without this comment, or you can just keep adding noise to this thread. Up to you.