←back to thread

Unexpected productivity boost of Rust

(lubeno.dev)
517 points bkolobara | 1 comments | 27 Aug 25 15:48 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
koakuma-chan ◴[27 Aug 25 16:22 UTC] No.45041723[source]▶
I encourage every one to at least stop writing code in Python.
replies(5): >>45041794 #>>45041941 #>>45042073 #>>45043031 #>>45049992 #
veber-alex ◴[27 Aug 25 16:40 UTC] No.45041941[source]▶
Here is some actual useful advice:

Use a type checker! Pyright can get you like 80% of Rust's type safety.

replies(7): >>45042031 #>>45042063 #>>45042147 #>>45042269 #>>45043223 #>>45047269 #>>45050186 #
koakuma-chan ◴[27 Aug 25 16:48 UTC] No.45042031[source]▶
I don't agree that Python can be saved by a type checker. The language itself is flawed irreversibly, as well as its ecosystem. It's a big big mess. Can't build reliable software in Python.
replies(5): >>45042142 #>>45042151 #>>45042254 #>>45042267 #>>45047827 #
grep_it ◴[27 Aug 25 16:58 UTC] No.45042151{3}[source]▶
Is this rage-bait? A language alone doesn't dictate reliability. There are tons of large scale systems out there running on Python. As for the language being, "flawed irreversibly", I'd be curious to hear you expand on that with examples.
replies(2): >>45043132 #>>45053870 #
1. IshKebab ◴[28 Aug 25 16:05 UTC] No.45053870{4}[source]▶
> A language alone doesn't dictate reliability.

Nobody would claim that. But are you trying to say that the language has no effect on reliability? Because that's obviously nonsense.

Language choice has some effect on reliability, and I would say Python's effect is mediocre-to-bad. Depending on if you use Pyright. Not too bad if you do. Pretty awful if you don't.