Hacker News
points by xscott 3 hours ago | 0 comments
My speculation about the grammar stuff is a little different. I dove into Rust the first time when it was still Graydon's Ocaml+Cyclone style, and the transition to the new syntax felt like it happened overnight. I think there were a lot of talented kids moving really fast, and I think they stumbled in a couple places.

Within reason, syntax doesn't really matter to me though. For instance, I was eager to learn the original sigil-based language. The downside to using familiar syntax in a radically different language is that the differences really catch you by surprise.

I fumbled around for a while before I learned those three bits of turbofish above, and I put them in my notes once I found them. It wasn't an easy thing to search for because the nomenclature and concepts are all different. Generics - not templates, traits - not classes, associated functions - not constructors. I'm still not sure about that last one. More debits to the strangeness budget.

Anyway, syntax and nomenclature are things any serious developer would get past. I thought a lot about starting a blog to document the real stumbling points I hit, but it would be tedious and whiny, and I'm not interested in building an audience.

[–] aw1621107 2 hours ago
Sounds like you're far more qualified than I am to be discussing Rust's syntax choices/changes! I haven't been around nearly as long.

> The downside to using familiar syntax in a radically different language is that the differences really catch you by surprise.

Definitely agreed. It's a fine needle to thread for devs and I would not be surprised if there were tradeoffs to be made between familiarity and not importing too much of the inspiring language.

> I thought a lot about starting a blog to document the real stumbling points I hit, but it would be tedious and whiny, and I'm not interested in building an audience.

For what it's worth I personally think I'd find such a thing interesting to read. Sounds like it could make for some good feedback for better onboarding as well (well, assuming you're not talking about stumbling points from your first forays into Rust. But even those can still have some intellectual value, if the interest in Graydon's reflections on Rust's early days are any indication)

[–] xscott 1 hour ago
Thank you for the friendly compliment, but I'm not qualified to say more than a little about Rust's syntax. I just have speculations about the parts I needed and which surprised me.

As for the blog, it would not have been good for onboarding people to Rust. "Stumbling points" was the wrong phrase. I meant something stronger and more critical than that.

Anyway, thank you for the friendly chat! Time for me to go to bed.