https://blog.djha.skin/blog/the-down-sides-of-gos-goroutines...
From this recent discussion:
It's not to say that Go is bad in this regard! It is just (always) doing the heavy lifting for you of abstracting over different colors of functions. This may have some performance or compatibility (especially wrt FFI) concerns.
Rust chose not to do this, which approach is "right" is subjective and will likely be argued elsewhere in this thread.
I think that's awesome. They've been afraid to "bless" an executor for good reasons, but pollster has 0 chance of "winning" even if blessed since it lacks so many features. However it's a solution to the problem you expressed: I/O crates can be async and used with pollster in sync contexts.
https://github.com/embassy-rs/embassy?tab=readme-ov-file#rus...
"Rust's async/await allows for unprecedently easy and efficient multitasking in embedded systems. Tasks get transformed at compile time into state machines that get run cooperatively. It requires no dynamic memory allocation, and runs on a single stack, so no per-task stack size tuning is required. It obsoletes the need for a traditional RTOS with kernel context switching, and is faster and smaller than one!"
I'm just toying with Raspberry Pi Pico and it's pretty nice.
Go and Rust have different use cases, the async-await is nice at a low level.
This story seems to very much belong on HN. Just because the statement is opinionated and some users don't like it, it doesn't mean that we can't debate about its merits.