Honestly Rust is an UGLY language. For whatever powers it possesses in memory safety, its cryptic symbology is reminiscent of assembly.

This is a problem when language designers are mathematicians and don’t understand typographical nuance and visual weights.

▲

embedding-shape 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If I was forced to write it myself, then I'd agree, I'd use Clojure all day before Rust, because it's such a chore to write, edit and read.

The whole "with AI" kind of reduces my hate for Rust though, and increases the appreciation for how strict the language is, especially when the agents themselves does the whole "do change > see error/warning > adjust code > re-check > repeat" loop themselves, which seems to work better the more strict the language is, as far as I can tell.

The "helpful" error messages from Rust can be a bit deceiving though, as the agents first instinct seems to be to always try what the error message recommends, but sometimes the error is just a symptom of a deeper issue, not the actual root issue.

▲

pelasaco 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If I was forced to write it myself, i would love to keep writing ruby. What a wonderful language. I dont write ruby anymore, mostly using golang and python.. but ruby still a joy.

▲

boitiga 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s funny I got downvoted immediately as expected.

I mean God help us should a crustacean try to understand the merits of my claim.

“Oh he’s saying something negative about rust…” Downvote!

I think with AI the language should still be readable. Humans need to be able to understand what’s going on!

▲

embedding-shape 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Hardly surprising, you give a strong opinion but you don't actually back that up by any arguments, that stuff tends to be downvoted here. Add some proper reasoning and making it clear why you think as you think, and people will stop downvoting :) Also, stop caring about magic internet points, they don't matter and people downvote random stuff sometimes.

	▲	boitiga 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You’re right on both counts. However, if I link to gestalt theory of psychology; The Elements of Typographical Style by Robert Bringhurst; and The Primer of Visual literacy by Donis Dondis, folks will undoubtedly NOT read it and still downvote because they have been in Rust code and so have naturally become accustomed to its monstrous appearance. :) Perhaps I should design a language that is typographically sound—something like brainf*ck haha

▲

_verandaguy 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why would the language being typographically ugly matter? Python's pretty, but it hides a lot of functional nuance behind that. Rust is terse, but it's also expressive in its terseness.

If you want to give it a fair shot, it does take some time to get used to, coming from something like Python or Ruby. I won't deny that. I've found that using LSP-assissted semantic syntax highlighting helps, for me, on the typographic front.

I don't think typographic design is a key consideration in most languages' designs, though, and I don't think it should be. The main thing I look for is consistent, relatively predictable rules around the syntax, as far as that layer of language choice goes.

▲

stymaar 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I really don't get the complain about Rust's syntax, it's almost identical to TypeScript's and nobody complains about TypeScript Synthax being ugly …

(Yes, I know the 'a lifetimes are a bit weird, and that's not something that exist in typescript, but that's also not something you use everyday in Rust either.

	▲	jdw64 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

peter-m80 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

To me it looks clean and concise

	▲	boitiga 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I’m curious why? Also I’m curious how long you have programmed in Rust?