Such a boring release. That's why I love Rust.
For me the best releases will be when it matches D/Delphi/Ada/Eiffel/.NET Native compile times and cargo supports binary dependencies. The language as such is already quite good, in spite of one or other possible improvements on borrow checker ergonomics (e.g. callbacks).
Rust 1.34.0
21–30 of 149 posts
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#22It feels like Rust is now 'stable'. Are there any major language related things in the pipeline?
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#23Such a boring release. That's why I love Rust.
For me the best releases will be when it matches D/Delphi/Ada/Eiffel/.NET Native compile times and cargo supports binary dependencies. The language as such is already quite good, in spite of one or other possible improvements on borrow checker ergonomics (e.g. callbacks).
Any ideas on when this will be? There has been talk about faster compile times for years now without that much apparent progress.
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#24It feels like Rust is now 'stable'. Are there any major language related things in the pipeline?
On a different level, a lot of work has been planned to address compiler performance, improve IDE integration, and provide better support of special workflows e.g. for embedded development, or for WASM and the like. Work is also still ongoing on writing high-quality reference documentation for the language, and moreover for a better understanding of how exactly unsafe code should be expected to work, which in turn will enable a more formal approach to the Rust language as a whole.
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the best releases will be when it matches D/Delphi/Ada/Eiffel/.NET Native compile times and cargo supports binary dependencies. The language as such is already quite good, in spite of one or other possible improvements on borrow checker ergonomics (e.g. callbacks).
Why binary dependencies, what for?
Many commercial use cases require distribution of binary libraries, Rust community might care about winning those customers, or just let them go and leave them to keep using the languages that fulfil such use cases.
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the best releases will be when it matches D/Delphi/Ada/Eiffel/.NET Native compile times and cargo supports binary dependencies. The language as such is already quite good, in spite of one or other possible improvements on borrow checker ergonomics (e.g. callbacks).
Binary deps are on the Cargo team’s plans for the year, and compile times are always a focus. Working on it!
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the best releases will be when it matches D/Delphi/Ada/Eiffel/.NET Native compile times and cargo supports binary dependencies. The language as such is already quite good, in spite of one or other possible improvements on borrow checker ergonomics (e.g. callbacks).
We will soon have async/await syntax which will replace some of the use case of callbacks, and (I assume) reduce the borrow bookkeeping tedium.
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#28Hmm, fn before_exec strikes me as a thing that should be gotten rid of entirely in favor of unsafe fn before_exec if the former indeed turned out to actually have the potential to cause undefined behavior. But that'd probably be a breaking change which would require a major version number bump, so deprecation is absolutely the right thing IMO. And it also sets the stage to get rid of it outright come the next major v…
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#29Hmm, fn before_exec strikes me as a thing that should be gotten rid of entirely in favor of unsafe fn before_exec if the former indeed turned out to actually have the potential to cause undefined behavior. But that'd probably be a breaking change which would require a major version number bump, so deprecation is absolutely the right thing IMO. And it also sets the stage to get rid of it outright come the next major v…
Re: Rust 1.34.0
#30Hmm, fn before_exec strikes me as a thing that should be gotten rid of entirely in favor of unsafe fn before_exec if the former indeed turned out to actually have the potential to cause undefined behavior. But that'd probably be a breaking change which would require a major version number bump, so deprecation is absolutely the right thing IMO. And it also sets the stage to get rid of it outright come the next major v…