• Pipoca@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Right tool for the job, sure, but that evolves over time.

    Like, years back carpenters didn’t have access to table saws that didn’t have safety features that prevent you from cutting off your fingers by stopping the blade as soon as it touches them. Now we do. Are old table saws still the “right tool for the job”, or are they just a dangerous version of a modern tool that results in needless accidents?

    Is C still the right tool for the job in places where Rust is a good option?

    • Metype @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      There’s a project I could have written in Rust. Maybe some of the headache wouldn’t have ever happened using Rust.

      I also didn’t know Rust at the time and it was a large project with unkind deadlines. I think the right tool for the job can also depend on available resources. So while the more unsafe, older tool I used caused a few small issues that Rust would not have; the project wouldn’t have been finished if I’d used Rust.

      • Pipoca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah, projects also exist in the real world and practical considerations matter.

        The legacy C/C++ code base might slowly and strategically have components refactored into rust, or you might leave it.

        The C/C++ team might be interested in trying Rust, but have to code urgent projects in C/C++.

        In the same way that if you have a perfectly good felling axe and someone just invented the chain saw, you’re better off felling that tree with your axe than going into town, buying a chainsaw and figuring out how to use it. The axe isn’t really the right tool for the job anymore, but it still works.