4 ms·
I haven't looked at Rust, but it seems from the outside that releasing a stable version of a language every six weeks is very aggresive?
by eCa 12y ago
I haven't looked at Rust, but it seems from the outside that releasing a stable version of a language every six weeks is very aggresive?
- steveklabnik 12y agoContinuous deployment is common in the web world. It's true that it's aggressive, but we think it's going to have significant benefits.
- pbsd 12y agoPeople tend to expect more stability from a systems language than a web one. Can I trust that my Rust 1.0 code will work, unchanged, 20 years from now? If not, the language is likely to remain in the enthusiast realm.
- steveklabnik 12y agoTo be clear, Rust is following SemVer, and the six-week releases are 1.x versions. So they should be backwards compatible. There's no current timeline for a 2.x.
- eCa 12y agoYes, I'm not saying it's a bad thing. It does imho put a lot more pressure on the language developers than a cd'd web app, with regards to backwards compatibility and such. (With ~10 releases a year there's bound to be accidental breakage that passes the beta period.) Ambitious might have been a better word than aggresive..
- wycats 12y agoI'm sure that seemed true about web browsers too. The trick is feature flagging all new API surface and only including flagged code when it's deemed stable.