Why most of programmers of Rust and FP always sounds like a fucking cult?

Whenever you complain about something about their languages 68912 users appear out of blue to say that you didn't understand and attempt to convince you how amazing its language

I made a quip about Rust being a cargo cult, once (emphasis on cargo). I should've called it a cargo new religion...

Haskell and Racket are awesome, but I'm no good at learning syntax and they're no good at having it 🤣

@eletrotupi I had people pinging me on fedi or emailing me for months after I made this gemlog post dissing on rust:

The rust community is just the worst in general, I cannot stand their hubris to say “rewrite everything in rust.” I've never seen another programming language community where the majority unironically claims that their language is perfect for all use-cases and any dissent is objectively wrong.

@nytpu @eletrotupi the cargo cult never liked my observation of rust syntax as being the php of system programming... so yes, I too have committed crimes against rust, crimes far more serious it seems than what crimes rubocop would accuse me of doing against ruby kind.

@nytpu @eletrotupi good post! rust’s dependency situation is scarily similar to node’s (npm). “let’s just crowdsource the stdlib guys!”

@x @eletrotupi Some more of my adventures in rust:, Plus a good post by Drew DeVault about it:

I've been meaning to write a comprehensive treatise on all of my criticisms about the rust ecosystem but I've never gotten around to it.

@nytpu @eletrotupi thanks for the links. i’ve read drew’s post before.

I’ve been meaning to write a comprehensive treatise on all of my criticisms about the rust ecosystem but I’ve never gotten around to it.

i would be interested in reading this.

@nytpu @eletrotupi I get a feeling that there's been a huge influx of new programmers in the last few years and they just drank the kool aid about Rust because they literally don't know any better.

The one true language to future proof software development -- is Rust the new Java? 🤔
@eletrotupi Well FP languages tend to be awfully obscure and I guess being mostly related to things like emacs (a religion trying to be an editor) doesn't helps.

As for Rust… the zealots do not even try to understand why you would want to stay away from software in their favorite language.

@lanodan @eletrotupi some fp languages are great. I love ocaml. Haskell syntax, compared to Rust, is clean, simple, and consistent. Rust, with disabled type inference even for function returns, feels like a defective fp, and overall with its kitchen sink syntax, inconsistent rules, clumsy features tacked on because someone thought they were cool, feels like the php of system programming. Compiling correctly, yes, is important. Being able to read, code review, and understand the logic is too.

@tychosoft @eletrotupi I tend to say that Rust is NodeJS/npm philosophy but having used PHP years ago… I find this comparison quite funny.
(Never coded in Rust, I'm basically only minding the packaging part of it)

I think for FP languages at least other than Erlang, it's not really the syntax or the grammar but more like "Okay… how the hell do I manage to do X without Y" which goes quite horribly in hand with things like "You'll understand by practice rather than via explanations" (hello Monads, the thing which AFAIK made Haskell usable).
I think Elixir managed to break this part but to be honest I haven't looked much into FP languages.

@eletrotupi Honestly, I find all languages to be sort of shit in their own way.

@eletrotupi the reason is simple: they’ve invested so much time and energy in learning it and the surrounding math shit (category theory, i presume) and they’re forced to justify.

i love that languages like go make these types mad. “b-but you can’t just have a simple language that just works!!! 1”


Pure FP is like the "everything is an object" fanatisism Oracle tried to push with Java.

Regular FP seems pretty okay though. Racket seems like it let's you do just about anything you want.


Although I get why Haskell wants Pure FP. And, for theorem provers it makes a lot more sense.

Haskell's selling point is to be default lazy. This enforces pure FP and basically all of its other quirks. Laziness was popular in the programming language research community because it has a lot of fun properties.

But, I am surprised just as anyone that Haskell is sold as a general programming language. Resource constraints, and programmers that do not like the extra complexity and math are obvious problems for it.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Hometown is adapted from Mastodon, a decentralized social network with no ads, no corporate surveillance, and ethical design.