• pileghoff@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Async rust might suck, compared to async in higher level languages, but for someone comming from C, async rust simplifies a lot of stuff. It often feels like a lot of criticisms of rust boils down to the fact that rist was sold to both people using low and high level languages. I don’t doubt that async rust is shit when all you want is a faster typescript.

    Edit: I certainly also have my criticisms of rust and its async implementation, and I think some of the authors concerns are valid, it was just an observation about the tension between the needs of the two groups of users.

  • wim@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe it’s just me, but isn’t async programming a mess in all programming languages?

      • wim@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s a whole different thing to me. That’s not async, that’s channels and multithreading.

        I do that in Rust as well with mcsp channels and it’s been fine.

        It’s the async/await bit that I find incredibly akward all the time.

      • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        not really. first of all async in not the same as threading. And even then, while it makes parallel code easier to write (not easier to reason about), it still has the exact same footguns as anything else, as soon as you venture away from having only one consumer for every producer. Synchronization is still all on you

  • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Interesting read but I don’t agree that it’s as bad as the author makes it sound. I’m also curious what an alternative would be, if you don’t want a garbage collector?

    In my personal experience, you don’t run into all the Arc, Pin and 'static stuff that often. I would even say very rarely.

  • BB_C@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    fn foo(&big, &chungus)

    is out,

    async fn foo(&BIG_GLOBAL_STATIC_REF_OR_SIMILAR_HORROR, sendable_chungus.clone())

    is in.

    Or maybe you know

    fn foo(&big, &chungus)

    is out

    async fn foo(big, chungus) -> (big, chungus)

    is in

    Or

    async fn foo(big, chungus) {
      // ...
      tx.send((big, chungus)).await?;
      // ...
    }
    

    is in

    Moving (movable/sendable) data is not limited by number or direction, you know. And that second one even makes use of them great Hoare channels! And gives us control on how long we hold on to data before sending it back (modified or not). But I digress. Let’s go back to the important talking point that Hoare was right!