6 ms·
"should" is a nice ideal, but people will feel pressure, especially for tooling like a compiler that other teams depend on, where slipping schedule means slippi
by dbaupp 9y ago
"should" is a nice ideal, but people will feel pressure, especially for tooling like a compiler that other teams depend on, where slipping schedule means slipping their schedule too. Shipping more often lessens this, by meaning a missed release costs much less time.
Empirically, Rust has done a pretty good job of shipping fast and not releasing regressions, so it seems like this isn't mutually exclusive.
- majewsky 9y agoI think that those few people who rely on the newest-possible features in the compiler will be compiling with a nightly build anyway (possibly pinning to a known-good version until the next release). That's actually somewhat a meme within Rust, at least as far as my impression from the outside goes. There apparently were times where most interesting crates required some unfinished feature and thus a fairly recent nightly build of the compiler and/or Cargo. I believe that problem has decreased in the meantime, but as I said, I'm looking into Rust from the outside only and don't have much own experience.
- dbaupp 9y agoAccording to the developer survey last year, most of the community is using a stable compiler in some form[0]. I can only imagine that the ratio has improved since then, especially with custom derives in 1.15. Additionally, I semiregularly see people say that they don't use nightly in production, even if they're using it for preview/experiments/testing. [0]: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2016/06/30/State-of-Rust-Survey-2016.html#using-rust https://blog.rust-lang.org/2016/06/30/State-of-Rust-Survey-2...