Rust

I'll take salty C++ masochist for 5

This has been the nature of technical innovation since forever. Carriage mechanics were replaced by car mechanics and leech farmers were replaced by phlebotamists

I'm almost 22 and I have six years of intensive Rust usage, confirmed by many projects and contributions on Github. Switching to Rust was the best decision I ever made, because this post is partly true

This is such an incredible self-own.

Either:

• C++ is such a horrific language and Rust is so vastly superior that a person with 6 months of experience in Rust can be as productive and valuable as someone with 30 years of experience in C++.

• The person writing the post, and according to them C++ programmers in general, bring virtually nothing to the table other than knowing the syntax and semantics of C++, even after 30 years of programming.

This is so fucking stupid, I can't even.

For your mental health, have some reasonable arguments about Rust: https://www.heise.de/hintergrund/Entwicklung-Warum-Rust-die-Antwort-auf-miese-Software-und-Programmierfehler-ist-4879795.html

Since it's in German, here are the key points of the article (written from memory - the article is quite old, so I might misremember - best read the article yourself):

• Software development is stuck in a vicious cycle regarding project budgets.
  • Some competitors don't know better and just budget the "happy path", that assumes that everything during development goes right.
    • The author uses a term for this which I like a lot: "Hybris of the programmer"
  • Other competitors know better, but still have to lie in order to remain competitive when it comes to prices
  • Therefore almost all software projects end up with a way too low budget
    • So we get buggy software
• Rust might be a way out of this misery, because
  • it is understood that it takes longer to develop something with Rust
  • but on the flip-side the safety-guarantees rule out a lot of bugs
  • so customers who choose to have their project implemented using Rust are fully aware of the higher costs, but also the higher quality
  • and developers have a well known argument for the higher costs, and also have data that shows how this higher investment will yield a better quality product.

is this the programmers' version of "Dey took 'er jerbs!! Durka der!!"

https://www.softpost.org/rust/difference-between-rust-and-c

So, this "senior developer" is .. braindead & still allowed to be working, then?

_ /\ _

Can't the same thing be said about COBOL developers a few decades ago?

This is triggering me really good. Especially the part about seniors competing with juniors. Has this person ever met .... people?

Wait, so saving a ton of money by using a language that reduces production bugs is now a bad thing?

I'm a senior sw engineer, and I don't get paid because I know the vagueries of whatever language we're using, I get paid because I can lead a team that solves problems. I don't really care what the language is, but I do care that it's relatively easy to on-board someone in case we have turnover or something.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather be highly paid because I'm able to be really productive instead of highly paid because I'm literally the only shot the company has of fixing the bug.

Now you C++ fuckers know how I felt when you introduced C++ and devalued my COBOL skillset

The US government recommending memory safe languages has really given people worms in their heads