1. 20
  1.  

  2. 3

    Note: we depublished one of the benchmarks, because the benchmark was broken.

    Edit: using third party benchmarks that are broken is obviously fully on me.

    Edit 2: it was actually not the benchmark that was broken, but our fs layer. Fixed and much faster, now.

    1. 3

      What is the difference from tokio?

      1. 3

        Tokio is still 0.1, slowly moving towards 0.2 and making it clear that they are not going to stabilise in the coming months. Basically, the whole goalsetting is different. async-std is also harsher about keeping its reactor details away from library clients.

        A notable difference is our reliance on futures-rs for compatibility and the ability to write libraries that work with multiple reactors. Tokio, on the other hand, defines their own versions for traits like AsyncRead/Write: https://github.com/tokio-rs/tokio/pull/1744 (this post also contains, a little lower down, their intention to not stabilise)

        Also, the difference used to be bigger: async-std contained the first implementation of single allocation tasks and the JoinHandle based management, which tokio later adopted for speed and ergonomics.

      2. 1

        From the chat tutorial in the book:

        At the moment async-std requires Rust nightly

        Is this still true?

        1. 1

          Oops. No!

          Thanks!

        2. 1

          This is a really well-written blog post.