3 ms·

The saddest example I’ve come across so far is the lack of strftime, or any way to even print a clock time / date time in std. Even JavaScript has that. In a su

by oefrha 6y ago

The saddest example I’ve come across so far is the lack of strftime, or any way to even print a clock time / date time in std. Even JavaScript has that. In a supposedly way past 1.0 language one has to rely on 0.x third party libraries to do even the most basic things. Disclosure: only dabbled in Rust a bit, currently maintain two crates of some traction.

Cyph0n 6y ago
The rand and regex crates are two other examples. I would also prefer to have bindgen in the standard library. I’d love to use Rust in the OS I work on, but integrating our build system with Cargo and dealing with external crates is a huge obstacle.
- JoshTriplett 6y ago
  > I would also prefer to have bindgen in the standard library. That's a challenging one. I'd like to have native support for C integration as well, but we'll have to balance that with the stability of the corresponding clang interfaces, and the requirement to ship extra libraries that the Rust toolchain doesn't currently ship. Working on it, though. > The rand and regex crates are two other examples. rand I'd agree with, though it would need paring down to not have as many dependencies. For regex, there are multiple tradeoffs to be made; for instance, the most popular regex crate is fast and does most of what people want but doesn't have backreferences or lookahead/lookbehind assertions.
  - Cyph0n 6y ago
    > the requirement to ship extra libraries that the Rust toolchain doesn't currently ship. Ah, that's something I did not consider...
  - oefrha 6y ago
    Question: is bindgen std quality yet? It seems there are still largely unsolved problems, e.g. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-bindgen/issues/1549 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-bindgen/issues/1549 which is causing hundreds of warnings in a -sys crate of mine and for which I have no recourse.
petree 6y ago
I think the issue there is that versions are arbitrary and being able to tell when a library is 1.0 is a non-decidable problem. There are lots of 0.x crates which are stable and feel feature complete, but aren't specifically versioned as 1.0. I would actually prefer if the Rust std would not include functionality that's not essential, for example sockets don't seem essential and the standard library does not implement them in a particularly complete and well thought out manner either IMHO.

by oefrha 6y ago

Cyph0n 6y ago

The rand and regex crates are two other examples. I would also prefer to have bindgen in the standard library. I’d love to use Rust in the OS I work on, but integrating our build system with Cargo and dealing with external crates is a huge obstacle.

JoshTriplett 6y ago
> I would also prefer to have bindgen in the standard library. That's a challenging one. I'd like to have native support for C integration as well, but we'll have to balance that with the stability of the corresponding clang interfaces, and the requirement to ship extra libraries that the Rust toolchain doesn't currently ship. Working on it, though. > The rand and regex crates are two other examples. rand I'd agree with, though it would need paring down to not have as many dependencies. For regex, there are multiple tradeoffs to be made; for instance, the most popular regex crate is fast and does most of what people want but doesn't have backreferences or lookahead/lookbehind assertions.
- Cyph0n 6y ago
  > the requirement to ship extra libraries that the Rust toolchain doesn't currently ship. Ah, that's something I did not consider...
- oefrha 6y ago
  Question: is bindgen std quality yet? It seems there are still largely unsolved problems, e.g. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-bindgen/issues/1549 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-bindgen/issues/1549 which is causing hundreds of warnings in a -sys crate of mine and for which I have no recourse.

petree 6y ago

I think the issue there is that versions are arbitrary and being able to tell when a library is 1.0 is a non-decidable problem. There are lots of 0.x crates which are stable and feel feature complete, but aren't specifically versioned as 1.0. I would actually prefer if the Rust std would not include functionality that's not essential, for example sockets don't seem essential and the standard library does not implement them in a particularly complete and well thought out manner either IMHO.