4 ms·

Well, I'm not going to remove it. But I will see if I can find some time to improve it in the next few days. I've been meaning to cycle back around. Of course,

• steveklabnik 12y ago
  That's a bummer, because until then, you'll be strongly mis-representing Rust :/
  • kanaka 12y ago
    I'm quite happy to take PRs from an expert to address the issues and represent Rust better. :-) UPDATE: I will point out that the README is pretty clear that this is rust 0.13. Doesn't mean it's a good representation of rust 0.13 either of course, but it clearly isn't based on a recent version of Rust.
    • nkohari 12y ago
      Wait, you are being sarcastic, right? You know that you're replying to Steve Klabnik, who is on the Rust core team?
      • deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      • kanaka 12y ago
        Yes, it was intended to be somewhat in jest. "The expert" was a subtle (perhaps too subtle) acknowledgement of his role. Although, I am serious that if somebody with better Rust chops than I wants to fixup the code so that it represents Rust better, then I AM quite happy to pull those in and improve the implementation.
  • wooby 12y ago
    I hope that you are mis-representing Rust. I'd be pretty discouraged if I was learning a new language and one of the first interactions I had with a notable community member was a notice of take-down containing neither encouragement nor constructive criticism.
    • Dewie 12y ago
      Klabnik is a big voice in the Rust community. But regardless of how he might come across here; he is almost always positive and constructive when talking about the language. For that matter: the constructive part was in the other post where he suggested some improvements. I can understand if the pull request is seen as aggressive, though.
    • steveklabnik 12y ago
      To be clear: I spent about half an hour working on updating things for head Rust. But when a language changes as much as Rust does, at some point, if you haven't kept up with it, it's basically impossible to update, it's simply easier to nuke it and start all over. This is why we have always recommended that people use the nightlies rather than the releases, because even upgrading per-point release is quite difficult. Not only that, since it's unclear which version of Rust this even compiles with, it's not as if I could install an old Rust and submit particular, concrete improvements for a Rust of that vintage. Starting over from scratch _is_ a concrete improvement, because it's the actual best path to moving forward in this particular case. Have I mentioned how much I can't wait until 1.0.0 actually ships?
    • enjolras 12y ago
      I agree with you that this comment is quite harsh, but i'd like to point out that it's not a fair representation of steveklabnik's usual interaction with the community on reddit and IRC, as far as i can tell.
  • ilaksh 12y ago
    So get your Rust buddies together and fix it or rewrite it in the new apparently totally different Rust that has come out since October. Apparently this will require more than half an hour of one person's time. Or maybe it will take a week? Until then we only have this one representation for this case study, and it is a 100% valid representation of the reality of Rust development and Rust code. The fact that you tried and failed to update it is further demonstration of that. But you know, deep down, its still going to be relatively slow and massively verbose.
    • pcwalton 12y ago
      > But you know, deep down, its still going to be relatively slow and massively verbose. Why do you think it will be slow?
      • Dewie 12y ago
        Don't feed the troll. :) He obviously has an axe to grind and isn't looking to have a rational discussion. He even chose to take the good fight to Github, on Steve's pull request to the kanaka/mal repo.
        • deleted 12y ago
          [deleted]