3 ms·

Having come from Ruby (where you were also a visible member of the community) I really do prefer Rust's model where the standard library is kept a bit thinner a

Having come from Ruby (where you were also a visible member of the community) I really do prefer Rust's model where the standard library is kept a bit thinner and additional functionality that would have been part of the Ruby (or Golang) standard library is kept separate. The benefits are I'm sure not new to you. Updates and releases can be completely independent of Rust itself, and by not being in the standard library maintainers are able to deprecate and remove misfeatures when needed as opposed to having to support something that holds back a library for forever. The one downside though is that there is the unfortunate reality that—by leaving important parts of the ecosystem to random crate authors—important and heavily-used crates which would be part of other langs' stdlib can become unmaintained over time. This hasn't been too large a problem so far, but I do wonder if more could be done to promote community adoption of crates that are perceived to be more core to the ecosystem. The nursery is probably a good approximation to what I'm looking for, but without necessarily coming along with the implication that it should ever end up in `std`.

steveklabnik 4y ago
As someone who was merging PRs into a Ruby gem for the first time in years this past week... this also happens in Ruby, ha! I've been that failed random maintainer over there too. And I suspect standard libraries get far less 'maintenance' than many people think they do, especially compared to a popular external library.
- stouset 4y ago
  You're not wrong, but the signaling around `rust-lang-community/http-server-async` having one patch release in two years vs `r0ckst4ar-life/tokio-hat-tip` doing the same—even if both repos host the exact same code—is (in my eyes at least) completely different. Both could publish the exact same HTTP server crate but with one of those two, I can a) have some confidence that it's a probably a reasonable default choice, and b) assume that it's much more likely to be stable and mature than simply abandoned.

steveklabnik 4y ago

As someone who was merging PRs into a Ruby gem for the first time in years this past week... this also happens in Ruby, ha! I've been that failed random maintainer over there too. And I suspect standard libraries get far less 'maintenance' than many people think they do, especially compared to a popular external library.

stouset 4y ago
You're not wrong, but the signaling around `rust-lang-community/http-server-async` having one patch release in two years vs `r0ckst4ar-life/tokio-hat-tip` doing the same—even if both repos host the exact same code—is (in my eyes at least) completely different. Both could publish the exact same HTTP server crate but with one of those two, I can a) have some confidence that it's a probably a reasonable default choice, and b) assume that it's much more likely to be stable and mature than simply abandoned.