3 ms·

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand: I hate the growing trend of "everything bundled seperately" and "everything has it's own package manager".

by dijit 4y ago

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand: I hate the growing trend of "everything bundled seperately" and "everything has it's own package manager". On the other... Why are you compiling things using packages? If your job is dev work then surely you have a bunch of tools that are unversioned by the OS? (Perhaps you've considered that they're not actually unversioned). VSCode, which updates in the background, intellij IDEA which updates into /opt. There is value in having it packaged, it helps you have a relatively deterministic system especially w.r.t. building other packages. But what does it actually give you the developer? Surely it's better to use the native tools for the language, which are tailored precisely for this and guarantee that your dependencies will be versioned correctly and available? It's not like the binaries you create using the compiler require you to have the compiler installed.

superkuh 4y ago
I am an end user of programs people write in rust. Like when I tried to use a fast radio scanning software defined radio program written in rust. There was no compiled version. It was written 3 months after the version of compiler from my repos was released but still used forwards incompatible features. Or the time a web serial I was reading had a spider and epub generator written in rust. Approximately the same deal. And it's only become worse as my rustc became older than a few months. I am not a developer. I use my operating system to run software that other people write. Most of it like the above examples don't come from repos but the tools to compile them do. Or at least did until rust became popular.