3 ms·
>> Rust projects decay > The text doesn't match the headline here; Rust takes backwards compatibility very seriously, and rust code I wrote in 2016 against Rus
by nixpulvis 3y ago
>> Rust projects decay
> The text doesn't match the headline here; Rust takes backwards compatibility very seriously, and rust code I wrote in 2016 against Rust 1.10 still compiles with Rust 1.72 in 2023.
This hasn’t been my experience. Though it’s often not large changes that are needed. The bigger problem in my book is the crate ecosystem, which is riddled with abandonware. Though this issue plagues most all languages.
- icholy 3y agoFor all the praise cargo gets, the lack of namespaces seems like a pretty huge oversight :/
- necubi 3y agoThis is endlessly debated within the community (e.g., https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/blog-post-no-namespaces-in-rust-is-a-feature/13040 https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/blog-post-no-namespaces-in...), and there's no consensus on whether namespaces would be an improvement
- littlestymaar 3y agoThere's no consensus mostly because namespace proponent, despite all the noise they make, haven't been able to articulate a constructed argument about what namespace is actually bringing to the table. For instance, most of them bring typosquatting as a problem that namespaces solve, yet they completely ignore namespace typosquatting: for instance instead of typosquatting `ripgrep` with `rigrep`, you'd typosquat `burntsushi/ripgrep` with `bunrtsushi/ripgrep`…