I hope it provided an accurate summary. I think the original was more verbose and detailed than they needed to be.
I think their main point boils down to what most people already know about dynamic vs static type systems. Prototyping is stunted with static type systems. It’s the same reason why so many people use Python but critical, large projects typically avoid Python or only use it as a glue/wrapper.
The article discusses the author’s decision to stop using Rust for game development after three years, highlighting several challenges faced with the language in this context. Rust’s strict borrow checker and the requirement for frequent refactoring are noted as barriers to rapid prototyping and iteration, which are crucial in game development. The author also critiques the Rust game development ecosystem for being too tech-centric, which often sidelines the “game” aspect of development. They advocate for a development approach that prioritizes quick testing and iteration over strict code quality, which they find Rust does not support well.
I hope it provided an accurate summary. I think the original was more verbose and detailed than they needed to be.
I think their main point boils down to what most people already know about dynamic vs static type systems. Prototyping is stunted with static type systems. It’s the same reason why so many people use Python but critical, large projects typically avoid Python or only use it as a glue/wrapper.
That could have been a great introductory paragraph that could lead you into the details.
Great! When I have more time I’ll give it a read… just might be a few days.
The discussion on rust@programming.dev was pretty good overall if you’re interested.
That’s probably a better use of my time to grasp the article and what people think of it. Thanks a lot! I’ll check that out.