3 ms·

I haven't been tinkering with Rust, merely keep an eye on it until 1.0 lands. For those who are currently more in touch with the situation, does this release da

by gtaylor 12y ago

I haven't been tinkering with Rust, merely keep an eye on it until 1.0 lands. For those who are currently more in touch with the situation, does this release date look realistic, without quality suffering? Is the 1.0 release premature, aggressive, or very realistic? It seems like the standard library has seen a ton of work in the last month or two. I'm surprised at how aggressive the release schedule is, given how things are still churning a good deal.

aturon 12y ago
There has been a lot of work on `std`, but it's largely been consistency, cleanup and cutting APIs down -- though the recent path and IO reforms are more substantial, which is why we decided to put out another alpha before finalizing them.
kibwen 12y ago
> For those who are currently more in touch with the situation, does this > release date look realistic, without quality suffering? Is the 1.0 > release premature, aggressive, or very realistic? I think it's aggressive, but I don't think it's unrealistic. Personally I had hoped for a late June/early July release to give more time to solidify the docs and to shake out bugs in the compiler. There will definitely be people who say that the release is premature, but I'm personally not one of them. The core of the language is ready, even if some pieces around the edges could still use some refinement (and will see refinement, backwards-compatibly, in the coming releases). > I'm surprised at how aggressive the release schedule is, > given how things are still churning a good deal. You'd be surprised at how much of a motivator a concrete release date is. :) Churn is happening now because of the impending release, not despite it. The language intends to have a solid compatibility story (via semver) for post-1.0 releases, so everyone who'd been holding off on changes for the past few years has suddenly come out of the woodwork to implement them.
- gtaylor 12y ago
  That's re-assuring to hear. Thanks!

by gtaylor 12y ago

aturon 12y ago

There has been a lot of work on `std`, but it's largely been consistency, cleanup and cutting APIs down -- though the recent path and IO reforms are more substantial, which is why we decided to put out another alpha before finalizing them.

kibwen 12y ago

> For those who are currently more in touch with the situation, does this > release date look realistic, without quality suffering? Is the 1.0 > release premature, aggressive, or very realistic? I think it's aggressive, but I don't think it's unrealistic. Personally I had hoped for a late June/early July release to give more time to solidify the docs and to shake out bugs in the compiler. There will definitely be people who say that the release is premature, but I'm personally not one of them. The core of the language is ready, even if some pieces around the edges could still use some refinement (and will see refinement, backwards-compatibly, in the coming releases). > I'm surprised at how aggressive the release schedule is, > given how things are still churning a good deal. You'd be surprised at how much of a motivator a concrete release date is. :) Churn is happening now because of the impending release, not despite it. The language intends to have a solid compatibility story (via semver) for post-1.0 releases, so everyone who'd been holding off on changes for the past few years has suddenly come out of the woodwork to implement them.

gtaylor 12y ago
That's re-assuring to hear. Thanks!