I'm not pushing back against the article, but against the comments that tend to appear below articles like this. The headline in particular, to someone who doesn't read the article, could be taken as "Discord has decided that Rust is better than Go and here's why", and run with.
Are you really surprised or upset to see those types of comments when the article itself is about trying to adapt Go to become fundamentally more Rust-like?
Personally I think people can't help but notice the trend of Go users rediscovering bug-by-bug and frustration-by-frustration why Rust was designed the way it is.
I think it's you being biased against the article now. As I read it, it was pretty honest and really trying to find some sort of true, not just trying to bash Rust. Feels like Rust fans are very defensive against criticism of any sort, even when well intentioned as I think is the case here.
I don't think this comment really contributes to the discussion. It comes across as Rust advocacy without having any tangible points to make.
First paragraph: "I don't like it". Second paragraph: snide comment. Third paragraph: "I don't like it". Fourth paragraph: "Rust is better". Fifth paragraph: snide comment.
I'm sure this was well-intentioned but it had the effect of turning half the comments on an otherwise interesting thread into a Go vs. Rust language battle, which is not the topic of the story we're commenting on.
I know the Rust team doesn't have any animosity toward Go, at least not those that I have talked to. And the Go team certainly doesn't have anything against Rust. But I must say that I do notice you being overwhelmingly negative about Go a lot on HN and I wonder why you do that. Technically, yes, you are adding to the discussion in some ways but to me it seems unnecessary.
Naah, in my observation it is kind of bashing which is almost always around the fact that Go is not Rust, which amazes me each time why certain individuals do that instead of simply coding in Rust or writing more about Rust.
(Funny that it applies almost exclusively to Rust folks; I never saw any negativity towards Go from Zig folks, for example).
These individuals will of course downvote this comment as well as my previous comment, because they are so deeply emotionally tied to their choice of language that they hate even mentioning the mechanism; but I don't care about my points here, instead I care much more about the truth and honesty
There are many biased yet interesting blogs and talks about how Rust is the future of programming for domain XYZ. This article is not one of them. Breathless 90's-era posts about how Java and OOP will save the world look tame compared to BS contained in this article. I don't think this kind of argumentation is good for Rust or its potential users. God save the poor souls who are forced into Rust for no reason other than their CTO stumbled upon this article and was convinced of the hype.
Content quality is key. The post "We're choosing Rust, and not Go, C++, or Node.js" got flagged a few hours ago after reaching the front page briefly: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30465632 Although it reached some conclusions similar to those I might reach, it also (as another poster put it) "invited language flame wars" and contained some shoddy reasoning, which I and others did not appreciate.
I like reading posts touching on Rust which lead to thought-provoking and civil discussions — especially when the choice of Rust is germane — and I appreciate knowing that Rust is involved from the titling/marketing. Thanks for your good work!
Sorry. Either you are ignoring facts or you have not noticed at all. The point is if an article is about Rust it is quite unlikely that Go will appear in discussion but if it is Go discussion Rust will appear with almost 100% certainty.
This kind of promotion creates the tense atmosphere around Rust in the community.
I wonder if anyone has read the linked article?
The overhead of goroutines are well known. The article describes the problem and a solution.
Now someone who got bitten by the overhead of goroutines complains with a (understandable) little bitter tone. He has a good explanation for the issue and why he didn't use Rust but Node.
Citation:
>> I started exploring various options ranging from Rust, Elixir, Crystal, and Node.js. Rust was my second choice, but it doesn't have a good, stable, production ready WebSocket server library yet. Crystal was dropped due to conservative nature of Boehm GC, and Elixir also used more memory than I expected. Node.js surprisingly gave me a nice balance of memory usage and speed.
Then someone didn't seem to have read all the stuff comes around and smartly calls "Use the awesome Rust".
Dude. It's the internet. There's going to be a lot of people saying things that you don't like. What I'm trying to say is that your wish that people saying things you dont like would just "shut up" is probably not going to come true.
[Also, the article basically talks about how the person doesn't want to learn rust but doesn't think they have a choice not because rust is somehow "right" but because there are a lot of people who want to continue to use rust. This is about as far as you can get from a Rust Hype Machine as you can get without actually attacking the language.]
There are many factual errors in this article, and some ridiculous amount of hyperbole. Several Rust developers have already addressed the shortcomings on Reddit [1].
I'm simply of the opinion that a single blog post isn't enough info for you to make a judgement call on whether a rewrite or a port is a good idea or not.
Criticizing an article without even pointing out any specific criticisms (saying their technical reasons are "weak" isn't actually pointing out a flaw in their explanation, it's just you voicing your personal opinion) just seems to me like people are disagreeing out of habit or principle rather than that they actually have a reason why this company is making a bad decision.
Again, it's a blog post to announce their decision and explain their thought process. It wasn't a blog post meant to persuade lossolo that this port is required. For all you know, the decision making in the backroom might have been much more argumentative and demanding of a justification than what was written in a blog post.
And yes, people who hate on Rust on principle do rub me the wrong way. The pendulum has swung too far the other way; there are more annoying people complaining about Rust these days than annoying people rewriting things in Rust.
I have actually never seen anything like what you mentioned when it comes to Rust. I think I have actually lost ~50-70 karma here on HN for constructively calling out some flaws and things I don't like about Go. Hasn't happened with any other languages though.
I think the cult mentality with Go is a special kind.
Btw. I'm Go developer myself and I do like the language, but I just don't get the "jihadist" attitude that seems to be far too common here on HN.
> "nearly every Rust thread is has people taking shots at Go"
Often resulting from "this is so much more complicated than Go, why bother?" prodding as seen in lukaslalinsky's post above, at which point those "shots" are just asked-for information.
reply