I can second this. I have used rust since the 1.0 release and while there had been some churn in the earlier releases even that was fast to fix. By now it's n

I can second this. I have used rust since the 1.0 release and while there had been some churn in the earlier releases even that was fast to fix. By now it's nearly always new improved clippy analytics/warnings, but clippy is not rustc but a (the) external linker, so this isn't really rust compiler churn IMHO. Even when there was a bit of churn in the early stable releases it was often remarkable easy/fast to fix. If there where not trivial to fix things it was nearly always dependencies, not because they are bad but because if you have enough dependencies sooner or later one of them is no longer maintained or deprecates some functionality you need or do a new major release you should upgrade to. But even there it's much less painful then the experiences I had with e.g. npm and the JS ecosystem. The only really painful thing I did run into was ring/rustls during the time ring yanked all previous dependencies no mater if they where broken or worked fine and still frequently updated some of their core parts. That was no fun, but fully the fault of ring, and it's no longer doing this by now.