4 ms·

Aleksey is true to his “avoid success at all cost” strategy, constantly emphasizing that rust-analyzer is experimental and alpha quality. Even the installation

Aleksey is true to his “avoid success at all cost” strategy, constantly emphasizing that rust-analyzer is experimental and alpha quality. Even the installation process is I think deliberately clunky. In fact in my opinion it already provides a better IDE experience than RLS and is improving daily, whereas RLS is stuck in maintenance mode.

indemnity 7y ago
Also, you won't find a link to the Open Collective project for rust-analyzer on the GitHub repo or website. I'm also contributing to https://opencollective.com/rust-analyzer https://opencollective.com/rust-analyzer, I want it to be a viable project.
GolDDranks 7y ago
That is understandable in the sense that the original RLS seemed to follow an exact opposite of a strategy: it was frequently said to be "pretty good already" and "close to 1.0", but some people experienced crashes and the code completion not working, and were obviously let down, which led to even some animosity towards the project.
matklad 7y ago
Being alpha quality and providing better experience than RLS are not incompatible. rust-analyzer is definitely alpha-quality at the moment.
- dunkelheit 7y ago
  Sure, it is a good idea to be upfront about the current state of the project. Still I think I am not mistaken in my impression that you don't wish for rust-analyzer to become popular too early as that would put some unwanted constraints on experimentation. BTW, thanks the project and good luck! I use it daily and it is awesome.
  - matklad 7y ago
    >Still I think I am not mistaken in my impression that you don't wish for rust-analyzer to become popular too early as that would put some unwanted constraints on experimentation. You are not mistaken indeed. More specifically, I do want to maintain freedom of pushing completely broken code. It's not necessary about popularity, it's about user expectations. And I also don't allocate as much time as I could into things that directly increase popularity. Like, the "install extension from the market place" could have been done almost a month ago, but I still haven't got to it. It's not that I am deliberately pushing back against such improvements, I just don't push them forward to actively.

indemnity 7y ago

Also, you won't find a link to the Open Collective project for rust-analyzer on the GitHub repo or website. I'm also contributing to https://opencollective.com/rust-analyzer https://opencollective.com/rust-analyzer, I want it to be a viable project.

GolDDranks 7y ago

That is understandable in the sense that the original RLS seemed to follow an exact opposite of a strategy: it was frequently said to be "pretty good already" and "close to 1.0", but some people experienced crashes and the code completion not working, and were obviously let down, which led to even some animosity towards the project.

matklad 7y ago

Being alpha quality and providing better experience than RLS are not incompatible. rust-analyzer is definitely alpha-quality at the moment.

dunkelheit 7y ago
Sure, it is a good idea to be upfront about the current state of the project. Still I think I am not mistaken in my impression that you don't wish for rust-analyzer to become popular too early as that would put some unwanted constraints on experimentation. BTW, thanks the project and good luck! I use it daily and it is awesome.
- matklad 7y ago
  >Still I think I am not mistaken in my impression that you don't wish for rust-analyzer to become popular too early as that would put some unwanted constraints on experimentation. You are not mistaken indeed. More specifically, I do want to maintain freedom of pushing completely broken code. It's not necessary about popularity, it's about user expectations. And I also don't allocate as much time as I could into things that directly increase popularity. Like, the "install extension from the market place" could have been done almost a month ago, but I still haven't got to it. It's not that I am deliberately pushing back against such improvements, I just don't push them forward to actively.