"we will also consider skills in other production languages, such as Haskell, Clojure, OCaml, Rust and C++"

ah, of course, the classic "production" languages. wouldn't want to be using those other "developing" or "staging" languages... 🥱

i swear, the 🤡 count increases by the hour.

Maybe those are the languages *they* use in production. 🤷

I've never heard of Haskell being used for anything

Or rust

Or any of them only one of those languages is valid

I'm pretty sure nobody uses brainfuck or hexagony in production

@AvatarOfKaine I actually agree with AoK on this one. Wtf are they doing with Haskell in the job listing? I’d actually be very intrigued and apply to see if I could find out more.

It's like mentioning vala

@jeeper I mean this is cringe

This is pretty
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/...

@AvatarOfKaine I’m aware of production code written in each of those languages. That does depend on what you consider production, however. I know of Haskell being used in compilers, specialised dev tools and at least by GitHub in prod. I remember Clojure being used in prod at least by Netflix, and OCaml I bump into quite often used in the most surprising applications (but it makes sense, if it’s even half as good and omnipotent as F#)… and Rust, we all know where Rust is being used.

Tbh, if a company had these languages in their tech stack, I’d be more than intrigued to work for them. Give me Haskell any day over JS, Java, C#, C/C++ and all these cringy languages…

They want as few bugs in their code as possible and try to port the remaining C++ stuff to safer languages. Don't apply if you like botchery.

I can understand the hate if you are based on c++03, but modern c++ solves most of those bugs by default just by using shared_ptr, span, and the like.

Still, it baffles me how companies fail to understand that good programmers will write bug free code and bad programmers will break shit no matter the language.

@CoreFusionX a programmer so good they always write bug free code is a myth.

@100110111

And a language that prevents all bugs is also a myth 😜

@CoreFusionX true. There are languages that do make it pretty hard to write bugs, tho. Flawed logic is hard to detect, of course.

@100110111 No language makes it hard to write buggy code. At best a language makes it hard to mess up things like memory management (type safety is really just an extension to memory management), but beyond that there's no language that would prevent even simple bugs like division by zero.

@AvatarOfKaine Rust is used for Deno and SurrealDB...

@galena You say it like those are some mainstream technologies that matter. Who cares what some super niche database is written it...

@galena I'm saying last I looked I didn't see the benefit of the language it's just another technology to confuse people about what to learn

That being said
I don't use c.c++ but half the projects out there are written in it so I know how how to read and slowly modify it and I know how to use the build system

I don't really see the use in rust yet

Keep developing it and I might

Wrote a project in node
But I see no reason to write a strictly node Js program ever again

Js is ok for webpages
Electron is being used and it's not horrible but it's still clunky

I'd rather see a desktop tech built without a browser

@hitko I mean it more in a way to show that usefull stuff can be made outside of the stigma "Lets rewrite it in rust" and proof of concepts.

@hitko Parts of the Linux kernel will be written in Rust, that may be an example of something that matters

@hippolyte Oh yeah, that's kind of signifi... oh wait, no. The whole initiative to use Rust in Linux kernel has been led by people that are quite enthusiastic about using Rust, but not so keen on doing what it takes to actually integrate it with the rest of the core kernel functionality. The only parts of the kernel that have shown any use of Rust are things like small drivers, because those don't take much extra work to integrate with the rest of the kernel if written in Rust. Besides, there's not much effort being made to expand the use of Rust to other parts of the kernel simply because the parts where memory safety matters the most are also the parts where you need the ability to directly manipulate the memory in potentially unsafe ways.

@hitko That's production code though, and as you said it depends on a lot of things for Rust to be applied to relevant parts of the kernel (unsafe Rust exists for the purposes you mentioned too). What about Firefox ?

The language is quite equivalent to C++ when it comes to being used in various domains, it's not like it's an academic work or I don't know what functional beautiful-for-mathematicians language or some kind of lisp dialect. Saying that it's not suited for production sounds like high-level bullshit to me

@AvatarOfKaine https://pandoc.org/