43 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
43 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: blog-post
|
|
title: "Rust: Are we general purpose yet?"
|
|
description:
|
|
draft: true
|
|
date: 2025-06-02
|
|
updates:
|
|
- time: 2025-06-02
|
|
description: first iteration
|
|
tags:
|
|
- "#blog"
|
|
- "#rust"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Rust has been steadily improving over the past few years, we've gotten more
|
|
complete support for async, still not fully there yet, but we're getting there.
|
|
Const generics, closures and more have also seen improvements. But all these
|
|
language features, doesn't really tell us about Rusts place in the industry, so
|
|
in this post I'll try my best to explain if I think Rust is ready for the
|
|
mainstream.
|
|
|
|
First of all lets (try) define out what general purpose means.
|
|
|
|
> In computer software, a general-purpose programming language (GPL) is a
|
|
> programming language for building software in a wide variety of application
|
|
> domains. Conversely, a domain-specific programming language (DSL) is used
|
|
> within a specific area.
|
|
|
|
[wikipedia: general purpose programming language](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_programming_language)
|
|
|
|
In laymans terms, a language that can be written to target varied use-cases,
|
|
whether they be: application development, web services, systems programming,
|
|
etc.
|
|
|
|
My own definition also includes choice, weirdly enough. This means do people
|
|
consider _it_ a mainstream language. When they pick up a new project, do they
|
|
actively weigh Rust as a contender. And do people choose rust for these cases.
|
|
|
|
With these definitions we're not gonna end up with a yes/no situation, there is
|
|
definitely a gray zone, a large one at that.
|
|
|
|
I'll be doing a fairly biased
|