Live data from Hacker News

Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

github.com

11–17 of 17 posts

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#11

How does this stack up versus cheat.sh ? I really should be making use of one of these and I would prefer to learn the most useful.

Navi can be a wrapper for a lot of other cheat sheet tools including cheat.sh and tldr besides handling your own sets of cheat sheets. https://github.com/denisidoro/navi/blob/master/docs/cheatshe...

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#12
post #3

It’s quite insane the amount of nice tooling people have been building thanks to Rust. I’m wondering why is it that Rust transitioned us to a new era for open source. My bet is the package manager.

Honestly, I think part of this perception is the fact that things developed in Rust are more likely to advertise themselves as such. For example, I know that micro text editor is developed in Go only because I checked. I have no need to know this as an end-user, but many Rust-based projects seem quite eager to highlight that.

[deleted]

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#13
post #3

It’s quite insane the amount of nice tooling people have been building thanks to Rust. I’m wondering why is it that Rust transitioned us to a new era for open source. My bet is the package manager.

It seems to be becoming the new Go.

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say it's a new era of open source, there's nothing novel about licensing from rust. But from a tool perspective both rust and golang support easy static binary creation and IMHO that's why you see both of them being popular with modern CLI tools. Gone are the days of packaging up distro-specific binaries, or worse yet depending on some system installed script interpreter (and all the myriad of ways it can…

> But from a tool perspective both rust and golang support easy static binary creation […] Honest question: As someone who knows C++ and CMake, what Rust and Go do to make it easier?

Disclaimer: I don't know C++ (well)/CMake(at all). I'm guessing the tooling for creating static binaries is only marginally better.

At least for rust (I'm not as familiar with Go), it brings super easy project setup and library inclusion.

E.g. for creating a project and running it:

> cargo new my-cli > cd my-cli > cargo run

And then all I need to do is add structopt to the cargo.toml file to bring in a command line parser with hygienic macros.

Edit: they also do static linking by default :EndEdit

‐---------------------

But what it really makes easier is not needing to worry about memory safety. C++ is good at making static binaries, even if it might be slightly more fiddly.

So it's more like the static binary is the advantage over scripted languages, and memory safety is the advantage over c++.

I would never attempt a tool in c++ now that I know Rust.

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say it's a new era of open source, there's nothing novel about licensing from rust. But from a tool perspective both rust and golang support easy static binary creation and IMHO that's why you see both of them being popular with modern CLI tools. Gone are the days of packaging up distro-specific binaries, or worse yet depending on some system installed script interpreter (and all the myriad of ways it can…

> But from a tool perspective both rust and golang support easy static binary creation […] Honest question: As someone who knows C++ and CMake, what Rust and Go do to make it easier?

It happens by default, more or less.

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say it's a new era of open source, there's nothing novel about licensing from rust. But from a tool perspective both rust and golang support easy static binary creation and IMHO that's why you see both of them being popular with modern CLI tools. Gone are the days of packaging up distro-specific binaries, or worse yet depending on some system installed script interpreter (and all the myriad of ways it can…

> But from a tool perspective both rust and golang support easy static binary creation […] Honest question: As someone who knows C++ and CMake, what Rust and Go do to make it easier?

As someone who has struggled with cmake for years, the answer can be found in setting up a simple Rust project in a few minutes: it will just work out of the box. The default config is all you need, and you won't have to do back and forths to understand other projects setups (unless they're massive). You will easily import and use dependencies you need, even small edge-cases can easily be a line in your config file.

Re: Navi- an interactive cheatsheet tool for the command line

#17
post #3

It’s quite insane the amount of nice tooling people have been building thanks to Rust. I’m wondering why is it that Rust transitioned us to a new era for open source. My bet is the package manager.

Honestly, I think part of this perception is the fact that things developed in Rust are more likely to advertise themselves as such. For example, I know that micro text editor is developed in Go only because I checked. I have no need to know this as an end-user, but many Rust-based projects seem quite eager to highlight that.

I have a feeling that advertising that it's Rust instantly means:

* you can reuse (parts of?) it in your project easily

* it will be fast

* you can contribute to it easily

Post reply on HN