<story><title>We moved from Pony to Rust</title><url>https://www.wallaroo.ai/blog-posts/wallaroo-move-to-rust</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Zababa</author><text>This feels like the same pattern as Dark leaving OCaml for F#: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;blog.darklang.com&amp;#x2F;leaving-ocaml&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;blog.darklang.com&amp;#x2F;leaving-ocaml&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;. Ecosystem matters a lot these days. Outside of these two specific cases, I wonder if we&amp;#x27;re, as an industry, too afraid of writing this kind of stuff now   I feel like it was done a lot before, and not at all these days. Sure, NIH syndrome is a fallacy, but having to write one library may not be so bad. I would be glad to hear about any experience with that.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pjmlp</author><text>That is why when comparing languages we should always look beyond grammar and semantics.&lt;p&gt;This is nothing new, it is also a reason why languages like C and C++ won the systems programming wars from the 1990&amp;#x27;s.&lt;p&gt;After a while one gets tired to write wrapper libraries, or having to pay extra for an additional compiler that isn&amp;#x27;t part of the platform SDKs.&lt;p&gt;Hence why successful languages always need some kind of killer feature, or a company with deep enough pockets willing to push it into the mainstream no matter what.&lt;p&gt;Same applies to new OS architecture ideas as well.</text></comment>
<story><title>We moved from Pony to Rust</title><url>https://www.wallaroo.ai/blog-posts/wallaroo-move-to-rust</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Zababa</author><text>This feels like the same pattern as Dark leaving OCaml for F#: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;blog.darklang.com&amp;#x2F;leaving-ocaml&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;blog.darklang.com&amp;#x2F;leaving-ocaml&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;. Ecosystem matters a lot these days. Outside of these two specific cases, I wonder if we&amp;#x27;re, as an industry, too afraid of writing this kind of stuff now   I feel like it was done a lot before, and not at all these days. Sure, NIH syndrome is a fallacy, but having to write one library may not be so bad. I would be glad to hear about any experience with that.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wyager</author><text>I used to work at an OCaml company and it wasn&amp;#x27;t nearly as much of an issue as one might predict. You can (it turns out) build a very successful business even if there aren&amp;#x27;t a lot of existing libraries, or if the language lacks certain basic features like native multithreading (same with Python of course). I don&amp;#x27;t have a great model for &lt;i&gt;why&lt;/i&gt; this isn&amp;#x27;t devastatingly expensive, but it&amp;#x27;s probably some combination of&lt;p&gt;* Most existing libraries are kind of bad anyway so you&amp;#x27;re not missing out much by not using them&lt;p&gt;* If you write everything yourself you get system expertise &amp;quot;for free&amp;quot;, and gaining expertise in something that already exists is hard&lt;p&gt;* You can tailor everything to your business requirements&lt;p&gt;* Writing libraries is &amp;quot;fun work&amp;quot; so it&amp;#x27;s easier to be productive while doing it</text></comment>