Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rust 1.45

blog.rust-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 227 posts

Re: Rust 1.45

#181

Post by kazinator »

jeffparsons wrote: post #179
The_rationalist wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>= 1.0 in semantic versioning universally means that it should be "stable enough"

I think you're missing the point of contention. > [...] it's not even 1.0 yet. Thus, it isn't stable enough for production use. API stability (i.e. how the API will change in future) is largely unrelated to the question of whether you can trust it to work in production. Maybe for some people API stability is a "must have" for production use, for the sake of minimizing churn when upgrading dependencies, but that's far…

> plenty of libraries with stable APIs that are buggy piles of hacks.

E.g. the API:

   char *gets(char *s);
has not changed in probably forty years. Rock stable!

Re: Rust 1.45

#182

Post by darksaints »

jhasse wrote: post #163
nicoburns wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Rust ecosystem typically has much more conservative version numbers than other ecosystems though, and higher quality standards. There are several very high quality crates with 0.x version numbers.

They are doing it wrong then.

One could argue that if you are relying on magic number schemas to decide if a library is stable enough for your usecase, it is you that is doing it wrong.

Re: Rust 1.45

#183

Post by proverbialbunny »

cuddlybacon wrote: post #146

As someone who hasn't used Rust, I am curious about why Rust has macros. I use C++ at work, which admittedly isn't the language I use most, and macros are used quite a bit in the code base. I find they just make the code harder to read, reason about, debug, and sometimes even write. I don't see them really living up to their claimed value. Is there something different about Rust's macros that make them better?

>I use C++ at work, ..., and macros are used quite a bit in the code base.

Ouch. Modern C++ has alternatives to C macros. Is it an old code base, or is it just written in the C++98 style?

Today people will typically use constexpr instead of #define. While macros can possibly do some funky things constexpr can't, you'd be hard pressed to find those things. (C++ supports constexpr if, constexpr functions, constexpr lambdas, math, and so on.)

If you have the time and effort, it may be worthwhile to slowly start modernizing the code base, bit by bit.

The advantage of modern day C++ is it catches errors at compile time that older versions did not and would crash while the software was running. You might improve the stability of the code base if you help out.

Re: Rust 1.45

#184

Post by nullc »

kibwen wrote: post #166
cornstalks wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> `as` is not considered idiomatic in Rust code Yes it is. It's used all the time . There's a reason as_conversions defaults to Allow in clippy. Of course, there are lots of situations where `as` is the wrong tool for the job, but I think it's a bit of a stretch to call `as` "not idiomatic". It's perfectly idiomatic in lots of situations. Whether or not it should be idiomatic is a separate question.

I think the parent poster is jumping the gun, but it is true that the flaws in `as` have been acknowledged for a long time and alternatives for specific use cases have been regularly introduced in order to reduce its use where possible. Giving it dedicated syntax might be one of the bigger warts of Rust 1.0: it may be the most convenient way to cast between primitive types, but it's often not the best way. IOW, is it…

Well or being a temporal throwback instead of gun jumping. The initial handling of integer overflow was another such decision in my view, but it was ultimately reversed.

Re: Rust 1.45

#185

Post by cuddlybacon »

kibwen wrote: post #180
cuddlybacon wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> C Macros are lacking because they are very primitive, e.g. they have not type system. They are also hardly turing complete. Its extremely hard to write a meaningful algorithm in them. I think this may be why I'm having a hard time appreciating them. Probably half the macros I see could just be a function call. The majority of those that don't are hiding a conditional return or goto, which I find to be a net negativ…

> Probably half the macros I see could just be a function call. Yes, that particular breed of C macros would likely manifest in Rust as people just defining a new function. In Rust, you tend to see macros in places where "just make a new function" doesn't suffice for whatever reason; for example, maybe you need to define a dozen different structs that only differ by the type of one field, so instead of actually defin…

Your define_my_struct! actually seems useful. Thanks for that example.

Re: Rust 1.45

#186

Post by milancurcic »

jabl wrote: post #126
milancurcic wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortran predictably overflows the result, in contrast to fptoui which gives a poison value. I agree that even a predictable overflow can bite you on the behind. But it's better than undefined behavior. I'm not a fan of saturated cast, but having a defined behavior is for sure a great improvement.

> Fortran predictably overflows the result Not sure what you mean here, and I don't have the standard at hand ATM, but I'm quite sure this is undefined behaviour in Fortran. But yes, I agree defined behaviour is good. Undefined behaviour is occasionally good for optimization, at the cost of gray hairs for users.

Standard? True, undefined. Compilers, however, happily overflow unless you tell them to catch it at run time. So, my original statement is at least half false. :)

Re: Rust 1.45

#187

Post by hermanradtke »

sitkack wrote: post #29

> Rust 1.45.0 adds the ability to invoke procedural macros in three new places! Rust 1.45 will be the Rocket Release. It unblocks Rocket running on stable as tracked here https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/issues/19 This is so excellent, and I love seeing long term, multiyear goals get completed. It isn't just this release, but all the releases in between. The Rust team and community is amazing.

Sadly, not quite there yet: https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/issues/19#issuecomme...

Re: Rust 1.45

#188

Post by sjwright »

baseballdork wrote: post #78
sjwright wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you want math errors to be less obnoxious?

I think they just prefer them to be less destructive.

“Destructive”, regardless how minor, should be intentional or at the very least conscious. This is one of the various reasons why serious audio processing is done as 32 bit float: no (practical) risk of unexpected overflows.

Re: Rust 1.45

#189

Post by tekknik »

Jweb_Guru wrote: post #134
steveklabnik wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Genuinely curious, how will you get someone to understand what ownership helps avoid without them having experienced the pain on the other side? This is an eternal debate about Rust. I don't think it's required though. Can you appreciate functions without understanding assembly and calling conventions? I believe the answer is yes :)

I actually find that people who aren't that familiar with programming are pretty quick to accept the idea that aliasing xor mutable is an okay rule... not because it's been exhaustively explained, but just because people have no real expectations at all about how things should work when they're starting out. A lot of language rules seem arbitrary at that point. Afterwards, when using other languages, they may even fi…

From someone who is self taught and learned C as a second language, is teaching rust at this stage a great idea? there is a lot of news about rust lately and it very much seems like people are seeing rust as a hammer and the world as nails.

Re: Rust 1.45

#190

Post by steveklabnik »

hermanradtke wrote: post #187
sitkack wrote: post #29

> Rust 1.45.0 adds the ability to invoke procedural macros in three new places! Rust 1.45 will be the Rocket Release. It unblocks Rocket running on stable as tracked here https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/issues/19 This is so excellent, and I love seeing long term, multiyear goals get completed. It isn't just this release, but all the releases in between. The Rust team and community is amazing.

Sadly, not quite there yet: https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Rocket/issues/19#issuecomme...

https://github.com/SergioBenitez/Pear/pull/27#issuecomment-6...
Post reply on HN