5 ms·
> Cargo is very opinionated, forcing upon you certain directory structures No, it expects source code in `src` like most C/C++ projects anyway. Then it's `lib.
by linkdd 4y ago
> Cargo is very opinionated, forcing upon you certain directory structures
No, it expects source code in `src` like most C/C++ projects anyway. Then it's `lib.rs` or `main.rs`. The opinionated directory structure (`pkg.rs` or `pkg/mod.rs`) is rustc not cargo.
> even a default VCS
Because it's the one used by most projects. Anyway, nothing prevents you from using mercurial, svn, ...
> Building multiple binaries and libraries from one project is a pain
Have you heard of Cargo workspaces? Because I've had no troubles with it.
> I think `gcc app.c` is way easier than using cargo
Agree to disagree. Because really soon, you'll want to manage dependencies.
- einpoklum 4y ago> it expects source code in `src` like most C/C++ projects anyway In C/C++ there's no expectation of the code being anywhere. > Because it's the [VCS] used by most projects. I don't see how a VCS being popular is a reason to require it. It's not even "essentially all projects", just "most projects".
- linkdd 4y ago> In C/C++ there's no expectation of the code being anywhere. That's not what I said. I said that most project do it this way anyway, regardless of any expectations. So who cares? > I don't see how a VCS being popular is a reason to require it. It is not required.
- virtualritz 4y ago> I don't see how a VCS being popular is a reason to require it [...] Neither do the authors of cargo: `cargo new --vcs none`