Of course but sometimes designers like architects design something that can’t easily be built.

Coding up a decent performing basic 3D finite element solver from scratch in C++. Still needed to know what I was doing but it’s a non trivial problem.

I still couldn’t get it to do more advanced stuff.

It’s non trivial now - will it get easier in 12 months though?

If the bottom is falling out of the market in AI I think it's likely other things will fall too though.

I have found this with (mechanical) engineers. They know what they want to see but don’t understand the underlying details which are more mathematical than the average engineer is able to work with. So the people working on engineering software are often physicists or applied mathematicians.

Ran into this, as well.

And they were really annoyed at being asked math questions.

Depends on the task and the writing though doesn't it?

There's not that much depth in a lot of 'everyday' writing. For many tasks that means that you don't need to be hyperintelligent - reading a recipe or a shopping list, reading a newspaper article, etc.

My much larger company has got people already using various models through Bedrock because the Claude and OpenAI limits are too harsh and it's too expensive.

I think this is an age thing but I think young people getting into programming are dramatically underserved by not doing this. I think Claude/ChatGPT are great at getting answer to a specific question or set of questions and even going quite deep on it, but they don't offer the clarity of the human 'big picture' and 'right order for introducing these concepts' view on a topic, at least not yet.

Edit: I should say, topic conceptual based books I mean here. Something like 'Designing Data Intensive Pipelines', not 'Learn Python' which is out of date before it's even published

> Rust still rely on many C and C++ libraries

Yes but Rust has a lot more availability of libraries to do stuff as a result. Want to do anything ML or scientific? You at least have a route in Rust where you don’t with Go.

With Go basic stuff like url parsing or HTTPS support is written in Go and comes with the standard library. With Rust too many necessary things are just wrappers around C and C++ making cross-compilation and reproducible builds much harder to archive.

As for availability if CGO is ok, then calling C or C++ code from Go is not that hard. Also, there is always an option to just start C++ process if extra data copies are OK.

Can you point out something that has a native Go library but not a native Rust counterpart?

The only thing I can think of is cryptography. We do have ring, but the default in rustls today is aws-lc-rs.

C APIs are much more annoying to wrap in Go than in Rust because of lack of enums (important) and unions (less important).

Nonsense, Rust has plenty of native libraries for HTTP and JSON.

Has there been a lot of progress with ML in Rust? I don't really keep up with it because it seems like every crate ends up getting abandoned and I just gave up caring.

About 12 years ago I went to go and work on some legacy C++ software when I was very green. We had a big code base and it had enum Bool { False = 0, True = 1 } everywhere. I thought it was a good idea to rationalise this since we had conversions all over the place to the modern bool type.

So I suggested it, got a PR up (bit painful) it got reviewed, went in, everything worked fine, and we came about a week towards releasing the product (6 monthly releases) before someone noticed that we couldn’t load files from previous versions. Turned out that we wrote lots of these old Bool types to binary data files and so the 4 byte data was now being read as 1 byte data. Oops. Reverted the whole lot. Lesson in humility!