Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

gitdot.io

251–260 of 322 posts

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#251

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

No, it is an advantage. I am not a rust evangelist, I am not a rust programmer or programmer at all; however while evaluating tools to use, anything written in Rust and Go at-least gets me to look at the project in more detail, since they most likely are able to ship statically linked binaries, which has been one of the key criteria for my personal evaluation of tools to select and use. So, you might not consider it…

The benefit is the static compilation.

But the "Written in rust" stuff comes with so much falsehood baggage about automatic best-in-class performance, automatic perfect safety, automatic rigor, that it is detrimental to just say "written in rust" and not provide a more nuanced statement about why that's good (or just drop it as a headline item!). You might not agree because you can single out one automatic benefit of rust b/c of Cargo (not rust), but even that is suspect b/c Rust can ship with dynamic libraries if configured to do so.

In this case, the credibility and benefits are clearer if they said "Static binary". This is all just context. If you see a benefit to that headline, that's ok.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#252
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the binary still depends on libc.so.6 (glibc) at runtime, then it is not a fully static binary (read: not a static binary). It is a dynamically linked executable, albeit one where most non-libc dependencies have been statically linked. I am not going to pretend I know Rust enough to comment (yes, would be a minute check), I was just commenting on the "Only libc is dynamically linked" bit.

That's the default. One can also statically bind that libc.so.6 quite easily. Though that's not the default. edit: Ironically, that makes shipping the binary a tad harder, since this "linux" version won't "magically" run on about every Linux, or mac version on mac, etc. I guess that's why its not the default, though that's just me guessing.

I really was just commenting on the "Only libc is dynamically linked" bit. But yeah, there are cons and pros of dynamic vs static. :)

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is an advantage. I am not a rust evangelist, I am not a rust programmer or programmer at all; however while evaluating tools to use, anything written in Rust and Go at-least gets me to look at the project in more detail, since they most likely are able to ship statically linked binaries, which has been one of the key criteria for my personal evaluation of tools to select and use. So, you might not consider it…

You can write git in any language, I don't see an advantage doing it in Rust besides the community and potential of promotion to that community.

You can write any program in any language, but there are definitely benefits of using some languages for some programs. If you disagree with this statement, there's nothing else to discuss, we have irreconcilable differences.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#256
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The community seems normal? Take this popular thread for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1tcrmjs/rewrite_bun_i... Many seems to be very skeptical and concerned about Bun being vibecoded. The rest of the subreddit is basically people showing off their work.

It's not about if the entire community is weird. But that a few vocal people doing something becomes the first impression of the ecosystem. Which is turning people off from exploring further, as you can see in this thread. You can make the case that if something like this turns you off from diving deeper into the language you probably weren't that motivated to begin with. But it is a noticable effect. This post isn't…

I mean, yeah... but I bet if Zig gets really popular, it will attract similarly toxic weirdoes.

Also if we're only judging whole communities by their toxic minorities, then... I'm so sorry Americans reading this, I've got some bad news for you, lol

What I'm trying to say is, it's best to try for yourself, and see if it fits your preferences, rather than letting others stop you from exploring.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is an advantage. I am not a rust evangelist, I am not a rust programmer or programmer at all; however while evaluating tools to use, anything written in Rust and Go at-least gets me to look at the project in more detail, since they most likely are able to ship statically linked binaries, which has been one of the key criteria for my personal evaluation of tools to select and use. So, you might not consider it…

"single binary, no dependencies besides crypto" would be an advantage, "written in Rust" tells nothing, except (successfully) trying to clickbait

There is no lie or misleading information about rust in the title so it’s clearly not clickbait.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#260

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

You assume that its used to show advantage, but we are on a technical forum and for me, as an engineer, its always interesting what language or tech was used to create a project.
Post reply on HN