Announcing Rust 1.35.0

I no longer care about Rust anymore because of their lang team's await syntax decision process. It seems the team only cares about satisfying themselves rather than listening to the community's concern. Whenever users spoke about problems proposed by the team, they simply dismissed them saying the concern doesn't contain any new information.

With this lang team, I think Rust is going to die quickly. It doesn't worth investment to learn it.

“There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses.”

For anyone playing along at home, when the async/await RFC was accepted, it left the final syntax of "await" to be decided before stabilization. That was a little over a year ago.

There was some debate, but it's been under pretty intense debate since at least November of last year. This has been the most discussed aspect of Rust ever. The tracking issue has 296 comments. There have been numerous threads on the internals forum, and recently, multiple threads on reddit per day. The team (which, I should note, I am not on) repeatedly asked for feedback, and read these threads, as well as participated in them.

It's been going in circles for ages. There are a few options with the syntax, but there's no clear standout winner; it really depends on how you weigh each pro and each con. At some point, though, it's the team's responsibility to decide. And so, on the sixth, they finally reached internal consensus. That's actually enough to just make the decision, but instead of just making the decision, they decided to go the extra mile, and say "here is our decision, and here are our reasons for reaching that decision. If you have something new to add to this incredibly long debate, please let us know, we'll be making the decision on the 23rd." : https://boats.gitlab.io/blog/post/await-decision/ The internals thread on this post alone is 420 posts long: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/a-final-proposal-for-await...

So yes, there are some vocal people who preferred a different syntax than the one that was chosen. Heck, I actually mostly prefer a different syntax. But at some point, a decision has to be made. Some people are not going to be happy with any decision. That's just how it is. It's not about "not listening to the concerns"; the concerns were listened to, but in the end, a different decision than (apparently) your preferred one was made. That's just how it goes sometimes. There are people who are equally passionate about this that would have been just as mad as you are now had the decision gone your way.

(I personally still wouldn't have made the call they did, but the call is reasonable. I've written code using it, and it's totally fine. I understand why the decision was made. We'll just have to see!)

You do you.

The reality was that _every_ time some discussion about the async syntax came up _every_ proposal and concern was uttered again. It's not that any direction was particularly more popular in the community than any other one, so it's not that the lang team decided against what the community wanted. The only thing that seemed certain in the end that all options have some downsides.

I'm very happy with the Rust lang team. They brought us this far, and I'm very happy with the vast majority of their decision. And apart from the async drama, they are delivering a lot of other nice goodies.

Cargo can work offline. It’s a requirement of the Firefox and Debian build systems, for example.

You can also use rustc without cargo if you really want, but Cargo is really good, so I don’t particularly recommend it.