1. 46
  1.  

  2. 4

    Custom derive, how fun! Was just talking to someone about that yesterday, didn’t know it already existed.

    1. 1

      I was a little disappointed 128bit int didn’t make it into the release notes. I guess I thought that was more important than it really was.

      1. 4

        It’s not in stable yet, so it doesn’t make the notes. When it does, it will absolutely be mentioned.

      2. 1

        I personally dislike rustup. Why cant cargo handle getting the right compiler version for building different projects?

        1. 3

          Wouldn’t that encourage people to pin their current version of the compiler and never upgrade? As far as I can see the rust devs already take great care to not break existing code, so sticking with rustc master should be safe.

          1. 13

            Rustup allows you to pin your current version as well. It’s very useful, especially if you’re working on nightly. Sticking to “rustc master” isn’t guaranteed to not break things, as that’s the whole point of nightly; there’s no stability guarantees. Those only apply to stable releases.

            The real issue here is that rustup also manages cargo versions, so having cargo do it would be weird. It’s about separation of concerns: rustup manages toolchains, cargo manages dependencies and building, rustc manages actually compiling your code. You can replace anything at any layer.

            1. 1

              I don’t really see a distinction between a toolchain and a dependency. I guess you need to break the loop somewhere though.

            2. 1

              I think semantic version ranges would work fine for the compiler.

          2. 1

            ❤.rust-lang.org, seriously? Well… why not, after all.

            1. 2

              You can use internationalized domain names to get a domain name with arbitrary unicode. I think it would be fun to buy the λ domain on one of the new TLDs.