4 ms·

Because it takes time. Even with coding agents, to add the capability. Then, there is the question on whether Rust developers who like to engage with Microsoft

Because it takes time. Even with coding agents, to add the capability. Then, there is the question on whether Rust developers who like to engage with Microsoft tools, would really consider Visual Studio as their IDE, instead of something like VS Code, VS Code Agent Mode, GitHub Copilot App, or GitHub Copilot CLI with simpler editors. I'd be curious to know whether Rust developers believe Visual Studio is the right place for Microsoft to invest Rust specific coding capabilities.

not_a9 21d ago
Visual Studio does have a really nice C++ debugger - one would imagine the C++ debugging capabilities should translate to Rust.
- pjmlp 21d ago
  Hot code reloading, and incremental linking would be great, given the build times.
  - deleted 21d ago
    [deleted]
pdpi 21d ago
There's two ways to approach this — build tooling for existing Rust developers to get them to adopt the Microsoft stack, or build tooling for existing Microsoft stack developers to get them to adopt Rust. I'd argue that the former is less important than the latter, and my understanding is that Visual Studio is still the IDE for Windows-centric development, so for those MS-first developers, Rust missing from VS means Rust is poorly supported, end of story.
- isolay 21d ago
  It would have to be the 2nd option. Who in their right mind would voluntarily choose Windows as their dev env? It will have to be those who are already there.
  - bluGill 21d ago
    Most people don't have a choice. Corporate IT has choosen what I run my machine on. I have used a native linux machine, but since my email is still on outlook, everybody uses teams, and all the non-code documents are on windows I end up having to have a windows machine. Linux in a VM under windows ends up being the easiest workflow (though I'm just starting to try WSL and so far it is looking good)
    - disgruntledphd2 21d ago
      > (though I'm just starting to try WSL and so far it is looking good) WSL is really nice, as is Windows Terminal. I particularly love its fonts (but that's probably just me).
      - throwaway85825 21d ago
        Did they ever fix terminal performance?
        ocdtrekkie 21d ago
        I think just running cmd still uses much less memory but Terminal is much, much faster than it was.
        peterfirefly 21d ago
        Mostly, yes. They didn't really apologize for the abuse they sent towards Muratori but they did essentially wind up with the architecture he proposed.
    - philwelch 21d ago
      Outlook and Teams are both web apps, or at least they were when I last used them. Even if you download the "native" app it's just Electron. I haven't had trouble using either of them on Linux.
      - 21d ago
germandiago 21d ago
> Even with coding agents Because of coding agents? :D
jiggawatts 21d ago
> Because it takes time. That's an excuse, not the reason. IntelliJ RustRover has been around for years. Similarly, VS Code has had Rust plugins written by the community in their spare time years ago.

not_a9 21d ago

Visual Studio does have a really nice C++ debugger - one would imagine the C++ debugging capabilities should translate to Rust.

pjmlp 21d ago
Hot code reloading, and incremental linking would be great, given the build times.
- deleted 21d ago
  [deleted]

pdpi 21d ago

There's two ways to approach this — build tooling for existing Rust developers to get them to adopt the Microsoft stack, or build tooling for existing Microsoft stack developers to get them to adopt Rust. I'd argue that the former is less important than the latter, and my understanding is that Visual Studio is still the IDE for Windows-centric development, so for those MS-first developers, Rust missing from VS means Rust is poorly supported, end of story.

isolay 21d ago
It would have to be the 2nd option. Who in their right mind would voluntarily choose Windows as their dev env? It will have to be those who are already there.
- bluGill 21d ago
  Most people don't have a choice. Corporate IT has choosen what I run my machine on. I have used a native linux machine, but since my email is still on outlook, everybody uses teams, and all the non-code documents are on windows I end up having to have a windows machine. Linux in a VM under windows ends up being the easiest workflow (though I'm just starting to try WSL and so far it is looking good)
  - disgruntledphd2 21d ago
    > (though I'm just starting to try WSL and so far it is looking good) WSL is really nice, as is Windows Terminal. I particularly love its fonts (but that's probably just me).
    - throwaway85825 21d ago
      Did they ever fix terminal performance?
      - ocdtrekkie 21d ago
        I think just running cmd still uses much less memory but Terminal is much, much faster than it was.
      - peterfirefly 21d ago
        Mostly, yes. They didn't really apologize for the abuse they sent towards Muratori but they did essentially wind up with the architecture he proposed.
  - philwelch 21d ago
    Outlook and Teams are both web apps, or at least they were when I last used them. Even if you download the "native" app it's just Electron. I haven't had trouble using either of them on Linux.
    - 21d ago

germandiago 21d ago

> Even with coding agents Because of coding agents? :D

jiggawatts 21d ago

> Because it takes time. That's an excuse, not the reason. IntelliJ RustRover has been around for years. Similarly, VS Code has had Rust plugins written by the community in their spare time years ago.