Topcoat is pushing the boundary of server applications with Rust

Topcoat is pushing the boundary of server applications with Rust(tokio.rs)

23 points by sagacity 3 hours ago | 22 comments

jazzypants 10 minutes ago |

Some absolutely great work, but I don't know why you would come up with a new term for a server component (shard). Why not just use the obvious client/server annotations so you don't have to define a novel term for new users?

victorbjorklund 43 minutes ago |

Sounds a lot like Liveview in Phoenix.

jdw64 58 minutes ago |

Has anyone here tried it?

haellsigh 44 minutes ago | |

I have tried it. It feels pretty good to use, but you have to keep in mind that it's very early software. They currently break the API every other week, and it's still missing a lot of fundamental features. I have made a few basic web apps with it, and on v0.8.1 it was still missing a lot of reactivity which meant you had to use Javascript to bridge the gap.

jdw64 28 minutes ago | | |

I used it in the early days, and it seems it's still the same. Thank you.

moffers 25 minutes ago | |

We’re using it to build our web app (https://uncook.xyz) and while it’s a slight departure from my team’s NodeJS background it’s been pretty cool to work with

jdw64 2 minutes ago | | |

cute app

cube00 1 hour ago |

> Look, I don’t know where we are going.

As honest as it is I can't risk using this anywhere near production if this is the attitude.

eminence32 47 minutes ago | |

Luckily there's a lot of people who write prototype code, toy projects, and other "non-production" code that can experiment with a new project like this

csoups14 25 minutes ago | |

I'd rather honestly than false confidence, there's something admirable about being this clear for sure

lolakutty 27 minutes ago |

Why bother with rust when you can write it in C and ask an LLM to weed out the memory bugs?

benjiro29 6 minutes ago | |

Why bother with rust when you can write it in C and ask an LLM to weed out the memory bugs?

Here is a idea, why not combine both? Have the advantage of Rust its build in checks and LLMs independent checks. Now you get both for a even more safe program.

huijzer 19 minutes ago | |

If you go that way, why not write LLVM Intermediate Representation? And if you know your server arch anyway, why not write machine code?

I personally like Rust for web applications a lot because you can catch many bugs at compile time instead of during tests or runtime.

officialchicken 12 minutes ago | | |

Reuse is bad / NIHS is good and it's hard to reach token metrics using accepted engineering practices. That leads to the point of having the LLM invent a new specialized job security chip architecture for your IR just to run CRUD app.

lolakutty 14 minutes ago | | |

>If you go that way, why not write LLVM Intermediate Representation? And if you know your server arch anyway, why not write machine code?

Nah, C is good enough for me.

> catch many bugs at compile time...

Rust borrow checker is too dumb that you catch many non-bugs as well...I don't like that.

Mmm..LLMs also generates false positives. But at least you can reason with it...

hmokiguess 17 minutes ago | | |

Soon we're gonna need a way to catch bugs at prompt time

cultofmetatron 12 minutes ago | |

> write it in C and ask an LLM to weed out the memory bugs?

because a non-determinist chain of reasoning is not the same as a fully deterministic algorithm. Its the best tool when a deterministic system is not feasable.

Georgelemental 25 minutes ago | |

Why bother with asking an LLM to weed out the memory bugs when you can write it in Rust?

lolakutty 23 minutes ago | | |

> when you can write it in Rust..

Because fuck borrow checker..(and the horrible syntax)

Ar-Curunir 22 minutes ago | |

Why bother with C when you can get an LLM to write it in Rust and not waste tokens on finding memory bugs