/
Published on 26.02.2026
TLDR: A seasoned JavaScript and TypeScript developer shares their honest experience learning Rust over six months while maintaining a production game server backend. The verdict: Cargo is a revelation, the compiler is your best mentor, but the learning curve is real.
When a JavaScript developer decides to learn Rust, you might expect the usual story about fighting the borrow checker and longing for the comfort of garbage collection. This account from Kitty Giraudel takes a refreshingly different path. After six months of writing production Rust for a game server backend, the biggest surprise was not what was hard but what was unexpectedly delightful.
Cargo earns the highest praise, and deservedly so. If you have ever spent an afternoon debugging conflicting peer dependencies in the npm ecosystem, or watched a node_modules folder balloon to a gigabyte, you will understand why Cargo feels like a breath of fresh air. It is a package manager, build tool, test runner, and documentation generator rolled into one coherent experience. There is no Babel, no Webpack, no tsconfig.json to wrestle with. You add a dependency, and it just works. Every. Single. Time.
The Rust compiler receives similar admiration, though for different reasons. Where TypeScript's compiler can feel like it is working against you with cryptic error messages, Rust's compiler acts more like a patient teacher. It tells you exactly what went wrong, often suggests the fix, and when you finally get your code to compile, you have an unusual level of confidence that it actually works. The Result type for error handling replaces the JavaScript tradition of try-catch-and-hope-for-the-best with something far more principled.
For architects and team leads considering Rust for performance-critical components in their stack, this experience report offers valuable signal. The author was productive within weeks for straightforward server logic, but concurrency patterns and lifetime annotations still demand significant investment. The sweet spot appears to be isolated backend services where JavaScript's single-threaded model creates bottlenecks. You do not need to rewrite your entire stack, but knowing where Rust can complement your existing JavaScript infrastructure is increasingly valuable.
What the author avoids discussing is the ecosystem maturity gap. Rust's web framework story, while improving rapidly, still lacks the plug-and-play middleware ecosystem that Express or Fastify developers take for granted. If you need authentication, rate limiting, session management, and database migrations out of the box, you are going to write more glue code in Rust.
Link: Six months of Rust
TLDR: Warper is an open-source React virtualization library that offloads scroll calculations to a Rust-compiled WebAssembly module, achieving zero-allocation hot paths and O(1) circular buffer operations for frame timing.
Virtualization libraries are the unsung heroes of any application that renders long lists. If you have ever scrolled through thousands of rows in a data table and noticed it felt smooth, there was likely a virtualization library doing the heavy lifting behind the scenes. Warper takes this concept and asks: what if we pushed the most computationally expensive parts into WebAssembly?
The version 7.2 release introduces several architectural decisions worth examining. The zero-allocation hot paths using TypedArrays mean that during rapid scrolling, the JavaScript garbage collector never gets triggered by the virtualization logic. This is significant because GC pauses are one of the primary causes of scroll jank in data-heavy React applications. By communicating between JavaScript and WebAssembly through shared TypedArray buffers, Warper sidesteps the overhead of serializing data across the boundary.
The O(1) circular buffer for frame timing is another clever choice. Traditional approaches to tracking scroll velocity and predicting where the user is heading involve arrays that grow and shrink, triggering allocations. A circular buffer has a fixed memory footprint and constant-time operations, which is exactly what you want in a hot loop that runs sixty times per second.
Universal bundler support is the pragmatic cherry on top. Warper works with Vite, Webpack, Rollup, esbuild, Parcel, and Next.js. The team clearly understood that a library can have the best performance characteristics in the world, but if it does not integrate cleanly with your build setup, adoption will stall.
For teams building data-intensive React applications, whether that is dashboards, trading platforms, or content management systems with large datasets, Warper represents an interesting evolution. The question architects should ask is whether the added complexity of a WASM dependency is justified by their performance requirements. For most CRUD applications with lists under a few thousand items, React Window or TanStack Virtual are perfectly adequate. Warper's sweet spot is the high-frequency, high-volume scenario where every millisecond of scroll performance matters.
What is missing from the discussion is the debugging story. When something goes wrong inside a WASM module, you lose the familiar JavaScript debugging experience. Stack traces become opaque, and the WebAssembly tooling ecosystem, while improving, is not yet at parity with browser DevTools for JavaScript.
Link: Warper: Rust Powered React Virtualisation Library
TLDR: A demonstration of Claude Code's custom skills feature applied to frontend development, showing how to create reusable, configurable AI-driven patterns for Three.js shader effects that prompt for options and apply consistent implementations.
The concept of AI coding skills is deceptively simple: instead of writing the same complex prompt every time you need a specific pattern, you package it as a reusable skill that Claude Code can invoke. This demonstration applies the concept to Three.js shader hover effects, which is a domain where the gap between knowing what you want and knowing how to implement it is particularly wide.
The skill in question prompts for configuration options like effect type (chromatic aberration, wave distortion), intensity levels, and animation styles. Once configured, it generates and applies the corresponding shader code. This is interesting not because of the specific shader effects, but because of what it reveals about the emerging workflow.
Think about how frontend teams currently handle complex visual effects. Either you have a specialist who understands GLSL and Three.js deeply, or you copy-paste from examples and tweak until something works. The skill-based approach occupies a middle ground: the domain expertise is encoded once in the skill definition, and then anyone on the team can apply it with consistent, tested results.
For engineering managers and architects, the implication extends beyond shader effects. Every team has patterns that are complex enough to get wrong but standardized enough to automate. Database migration scripts, authentication flows, performance monitoring setup, accessibility audit configurations. These are all candidates for the skills approach. The interesting architectural question is where these skills should live. In a shared repository? Versioned and published like npm packages? The tooling is new enough that best practices have not emerged yet.
The limitation that does not get enough attention is the feedback loop. When a skill generates code, who validates that the output is correct? For visual effects, you can see immediately if something looks wrong. For more subtle patterns like security configurations or performance optimizations, the generated code might look correct while introducing issues that only surface under specific conditions.
Link: Claude Code Skills are the Future of Frontend
TLDR: fnm is a cross-platform Node.js version manager built in Rust that offers instant startup, single-binary installation, and automatic version switching with .node-version and .nvmrc file support across macOS, Windows, and Linux.
If you have been using nvm to manage Node.js versions, you have probably noticed the startup penalty. Every time you open a new terminal, nvm needs to initialize, and on some systems that adds a noticeable delay. fnm solves this with a brutally simple approach: write it in Rust, compile to a single binary, and make shell initialization nearly instantaneous.
The cross-platform story is where fnm really differentiates itself. nvm has historically been a Unix-only tool, with nvm-windows being a completely separate project with different behavior and limitations. fnm works identically on macOS, Windows, and Linux. You install it, add a single line to your shell configuration, and it just works. For teams with mixed development environments, this eliminates an entire category of onboarding friction.
The automatic version switching via --use-on-cd is the feature that, once you experience it, you cannot go back from. Drop a .node-version file in your project root, and fnm switches to the correct version every time you cd into the directory. No more "works on my machine" issues caused by mismatched Node versions. No more manually running nvm use before starting development.
Installation options cover every reasonable scenario: Homebrew, Winget, Scoop, Chocolatey, Cargo, or a simple curl script. The shell integration supports Bash, Zsh, Fish, PowerShell, and even Windows Command Prompt. This level of platform coverage suggests a project that has been refined by real-world usage across diverse development environments.
For platform engineering teams and DevOps engineers who maintain developer tooling, fnm reduces the support burden significantly. A single tool, a single set of documentation, and consistent behavior across platforms. The Rust foundation also means the binary is self-contained with no runtime dependencies, which simplifies distribution through internal package managers or Docker images.
What fnm does not address, and what nvm also struggles with, is the broader question of whether version managers are still the right abstraction. With containers and devcontainers becoming mainstream, the argument for pinning Node versions at the project level rather than the system level gets stronger. But for the many teams not yet fully containerized, fnm is arguably the best tool for the job.
Link: fnm: Fast and simple Node.js version manager
TLDR: Cloudflare's experimental vinext plugin reimplements approximately 94% of the Next.js API surface on Vite, enabling deployment to Cloudflare Workers without the Next.js compiler toolchain. Built largely by AI in one week.
This one has been making waves, and for good reason. vinext is not a wrapper or adapter around Next.js. It is a ground-up reimplementation of the Next.js API surface on top of Vite, targeting Cloudflare Workers as the primary deployment platform. The headline stat is 94% API coverage, which includes both App Router and Pages Router, server actions, React Server Components via the new @vitejs/plugin-rsc, middleware, ISR, and the full suite of next/* module imports.
The AI-development angle is impossible to ignore. Cloudflare states that the vast majority of the code was written by Claude Code, with humans directing architecture and priorities. The test suite contains over 1,700 Vitest tests and 380 Playwright E2E tests, including tests ported from the Next.js test suite itself. This is one of the most concrete demonstrations of AI-driven development producing something substantial and testable.
The migration story is deliberately frictionless. You can run vinext init to automate the migration, which adds parallel scripts so your existing Next.js setup continues to work alongside vinext. The project even ships an Agent Skill that handles migration for you through AI coding tools. This is meta in the best way: an AI-built project that uses AI to help users adopt it.
For architects evaluating their Next.js deployment strategy, vinext represents an important data point even if you never use it. It demonstrates that the Next.js API surface is well-defined enough to reimplement, which has implications for platform lock-in discussions. If one team can rebuild it on Vite in a week, the API surface is more portable than many assumed.
The gap that deserves scrutiny is production readiness. The project's own FAQ advises caution for production use, and the "mostly nobody" reviewing code statement should give pause. The test suite is the primary quality gate, not human code review. For experimental and non-critical deployments, this could be exciting. For production workloads handling real traffic and revenue, the risk calculus is different.