4 ms·

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. All I did was ask a simple question: if trust in Rust is hard, how do you handle trust in other ecosystems?

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. All I did was ask a simple question: if trust in Rust is hard, how do you handle trust in other ecosystems? The details on exactly how big or how small the standard libraries are (or why they are that way) are less important for this particular question. Consider the size of Python's standard library vs C or C++ or Rust. The size of C or C++ is much closer to Rust's size than Python's size. Also, while some of your historical context is interesting, I don't really appreciate your editorialization, which I often find is off the mark personally.

pjmlp 7y ago
My point is that although many only think about ISO C libc when talking about C's standard library, the reality is that with a few exceptions, libc always goes alongside POSIX across the large majority of platforms with a C compiler. So in reality POSIX complements libc as C's "runtime platform", even though ISO C never considered to make libc that big. My historical context is how I experienced how things went, throughout the media we had available at the time. I surely welcome factual corrections when I fail off the mark. Everyone benefits from learning proper history facts.
- burntsushi 7y ago
  > My point is that although many only think about ISO C libc when talking about C's standard library I wasn't. Even with POSIX, it is spartan by today's standards. Look at the standard libraries of Python and Go. POSIX doesn't have JSON (de)serialization, HTTP servers, XML parsing and a whole boatload of other crap. So I don't think there is anything wrong with my characterization.