Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think it's still fair to say that the Rust community either attracts, or doesn't discourage this type of advocate in a way that other communities don't. Personally I've encountered this type of behavior in a few situations:

1. When Swift for TensorFlow was announced, the team released a document explaining that they had narrowed the language choice to 4 languages including Rust, and eliminated Rust based on the sharp learning curve. Once commenter unrelated to the project logged an issue on the GitHub page and went on for many multi-paragraph quotes about how Rust should have been the choice.

2. In a thread about gfx-portability, which similar to MoltenVK brings the Vulkan API to Apple platfortms, when the original poster was questioned about the comparative completeness and and performance of these two implementations, they were completely unable to offer details (like come on, you can't even say what percentage of the tests are passing based on the Vulkan portability standards? You never benchmarked against the most similar product on the market?) and deflected to making totally unfounded claims about how MoltenVK is unsafe and even dangerous to use.

3. In a thread about Rust syntax, I made a comment about how I personally lamented some of the choices made in the language, like going with snake_case as a convention, and naming dynamic arrays Vector. I was promptly downvoted and received several fervent responses explaining why my personal taste was objectively wrong.

I think Rust is an interesting and promising language, but there does seem to be a somewhat tribal tendency in the community which is a turn-off for me.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: