←back to thread

611 points LorenDB | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
dvratil ◴[] No.43908097[source]
The one thing that sold me on Rust (going from C++) was that there is a single way errors are propagated: the Result type. No need to bother with exceptions, functions returning bool, functions returning 0 on success, functions returning 0 on error, functions returning -1 on error, functions returning negative errno on error, functions taking optional pointer to bool to indicate error (optionally), functions taking reference to std::error_code to set an error (and having an overload with the same name that throws an exception on error if you forget to pass the std::error_code)...I understand there's 30 years of history, but it still is annoying, that even the standard library is not consistent (or striving for consistency).

Then you top it on with `?` shortcut and the functional interface of Result and suddenly error handling becomes fun and easy to deal with, rather than just "return false" with a "TODO: figure out error handling".

replies(24): >>43908133 #>>43908158 #>>43908212 #>>43908219 #>>43908294 #>>43908381 #>>43908419 #>>43908540 #>>43908623 #>>43908682 #>>43908981 #>>43909007 #>>43909117 #>>43909521 #>>43910388 #>>43912855 #>>43912904 #>>43913484 #>>43913794 #>>43914062 #>>43914514 #>>43917029 #>>43922951 #>>43924618 #
90s_dev ◴[] No.43908540[source]
I like so much about Rust.

But I hear compiling is too slow.

Is it a serious problem in practice?

replies(9): >>43908584 #>>43908616 #>>43908634 #>>43908644 #>>43908690 #>>43908851 #>>43909184 #>>43910126 #>>43927094 #
Seattle3503 ◴[] No.43908634[source]
Absolutely, the compile times are the biggest drawback IMO. Everywhere I've been that built large systems in Rust eventually ends up spending a good amount of dev time trying to get CI/CD pipeline times to something sane.

Besides developer productivity it can be an issue when you need a critical fix to go out quickly and your pipelines take 60+ minutes.

replies(4): >>43908723 #>>43908757 #>>43910113 #>>43913607 #
1. nicoburns ◴[] No.43910113{3}[source]
If you have the money to throw at it, you can get a long way optimising CI pipelines just by throwing faster hardware at it. The sort of server you could rent for ~$150/month might easily be ~5x faster than your typical Github Actions hosted runner.
replies(2): >>43910741 #>>43914316 #
2. Seattle3503 ◴[] No.43910741[source]
Yes, this is often the best "low-hanging fruit" option, but it can get expensive. It depends how you value your developer time.
3. hobofan ◴[] No.43914316[source]
Besides faster hardware, one of the main features (and drawbacks) you get with self-hosted runners is the option to break through build isolation, and have performant caches between builds.

With many other build systems I'd be hesitant to do that, but since Cargo is very good about what to rebuild for incremental builds, keeping the cache around is a huge speed boost.