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

Rust 1.48

blog.rust-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: Rust 1.48

#91

Post by JNRowe »

imron wrote: post #81
identity0 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In vim if you press K it will bring up the man page for the word under your cursor. It was very useful when learning C, considering that most libc functions have helpful man pages.

Note for people trying this at home, vim is case sensitive. I still regularly use this feature to look up libc and other things. You can also type 2K to go to ‘man 2’, or 3K to go to ‘man 3’ etc.

And for the sake of completeness, it is not just for man pages either. vim simply calls 'keywordprg' with the word under the cursor, so you can use whatever you feel like. Open a browser tab on your favourite documentation, display an ERD, pop open a picture of a kitten, …

Many filetype plugins come with pre-configured 'keywordprg' settings. Including some non-programming filetypes like git which will execute `git show `, which is great if you're the type of person who often references commits in other commit messages.

Re: Rust 1.48

#92

Post by gtrhtrhtrhtr »

0-_-0 wrote: post #5
bluejekyll wrote: post #2

One of the things that made me so excited about Rust when I first used it was the capabilities of the Rustdoc system. The built in examples that are also unit tests, the ease of just using markdown... and now the linking is even simpler. It’s one of my favorite things about the language, and I think is why so many crates have such good documentation, because it’s easy to do. (and it’s tested and validated so you know…

Not directly related, but when I was learning programming back in highschool (before the Internet) what made it easy was the built in help in Turbo Pascal. You could press F1 over any function or keyword and you were given a detailed description and example of usage. Learning C later using the K&R book and Google was a huge downgrade. Even today I think that language help built into the IDE should be a basic function…

I've seen this with bpython

Re: Rust 1.48

#93

Post by rsynnott »

kamilafsar wrote: post #57

A few months ago I tried Rust but found that the tooling like auto completion and highlighting where still a bit alpha. IIRC I used VSCode with the most popular Rust plugin at the time. Did I miss something or is there some progress being made in that respect?

The IntelliJ plugin is pretty good.

Re: Rust 1.48

#94

Post by TheAsprngHacker »

x87678r wrote: post #50
skrtskrt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go is the same. Everyone, including the stdlib maintainers seem to think a few lines of comments per method is the same as documentation on how to use the package, best practices, pitfalls, etc.

Java is the same as well

Interestingly, documentation that's only type signatures is also a frequent gripe I've heard about OCaml. So maybe this is a universal phenomenon.

However, some people contrast OCaml and Rust in this regard, contradicting the views of the great grand-parent comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25111104

Re: Rust 1.48

#95

Post by trevyn »

hobofan wrote: post #62
kamilafsar wrote: post #57

A few months ago I tried Rust but found that the tooling like auto completion and highlighting where still a bit alpha. IIRC I used VSCode with the most popular Rust plugin at the time. Did I miss something or is there some progress being made in that respect?

Sounds a bit strange. I'm using rust-analyzer in combination with TabNine (which both have integrations in every major editor), and it's among the best completion I've encountered across languages (though there are some limitations when it comes to proc-macros). Maybe it was still downloading some required binaries in the background when you were trying it out?

I’d love to see an open-source clone of TabNine.

Re: Rust 1.48

#96

Post by [deleted] »

0-_-0 wrote: post #5
bluejekyll wrote: post #2

One of the things that made me so excited about Rust when I first used it was the capabilities of the Rustdoc system. The built in examples that are also unit tests, the ease of just using markdown... and now the linking is even simpler. It’s one of my favorite things about the language, and I think is why so many crates have such good documentation, because it’s easy to do. (and it’s tested and validated so you know…

Not directly related, but when I was learning programming back in highschool (before the Internet) what made it easy was the built in help in Turbo Pascal. You could press F1 over any function or keyword and you were given a detailed description and example of usage. Learning C later using the K&R book and Google was a huge downgrade. Even today I think that language help built into the IDE should be a basic function…

[deleted]

Re: Rust 1.48

#97

Post by sitkack »

steveklabnik wrote: post #87
jedbrown wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's between a test written inside a comment (where smart IDE features don't apply) versus `#[test]` in normal code, where you have a rich editing environment and instant feedback (including `cargo build` failing immediately on errors). Perhaps it's just my perception, but doctests (in comments) seem slower to run.

Ah; rust-analyzer syntax highlights doc tests (though not perfectly), but the higher order bit of "IDE features don't work as well" makes tons of sense, thanks!

This is also part of my complaint. At least in Python, doctests limit the ability for the IDE to be effective.

They hinder the writer as well as the consumer, since they make it harder to write effective tests. What I am saying is, that all tests should be first class wrt the documentation.

Re: Rust 1.48

#98

Post by hinkley »

masklinn wrote: post #59
x87678r wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java is the same as well

So tldr: people don't like writing documentation, and it's hard to make them care.

If you can’t tell a story with text, you won’t be able to tell it with code either. The thing that makes people want better documentation is the same thing that makes it difficult to get.

I remember years ago using Ant as a build tool and the only way I figured it out was to Googlestalk the author. Given enough answers to questions in enough places I finally developed a theory of the system. It was still supremely weird to convince it to do certain things but at least I was able to.

Re: Rust 1.48

#99

Post by kibwen »

skrtskrt wrote: post #44
mike-cardwell wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always found crate documentation to be the worse thing about Rust. Because it auto-generates some documentation, people just assume that's good enough, and you end up with tonnes of crates that seemingly only have a list of functions and structs and what arguments they take, but very little information about how you're supposed to plug everything together.

Go is the same. Everyone, including the stdlib maintainers seem to think a few lines of comments per method is the same as documentation on how to use the package, best practices, pitfalls, etc.

Rust's stdlib does have a policy of having a runnable code example for every API.

Re: Rust 1.48

#100

Post by rudedogg »

Boulth6 wrote: post #71
0-_-0 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not directly related, but when I was learning programming back in highschool (before the Internet) what made it easy was the built in help in Turbo Pascal. You could press F1 over any function or keyword and you were given a detailed description and example of usage. Learning C later using the K&R book and Google was a huge downgrade. Even today I think that language help built into the IDE should be a basic function…

I've seen that with Delphi. The unique factor was that the examples were not a basic call of the function but an actual real world practical sample that usually solved the problem one was looking for.

I always loved this site: http://www.delphibasics.co.uk/RTL.asp?Name=ansicomparestr
Post reply on HN