Talk:Rust

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Things to add:

Add cargo.toml explanation
Should we duplicate the official docs? A link to the manifest documentation will be more complete and up-to-date. --Gyscos (talk) 23:18, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Add more links to the doc sections

rustup update

Rust has its own way to install and update rustup, but as users of archlinux we have a nice tool called AUR. Should we follow Rust's recommendation or tell users of the wiki to install rustup via AUR ?

Rustup adds some features that AUR doesn't provide, like easily switching the toolchain, and installing cross-compilers. Until the AUR provides the full matrix of configurations (cross-compiler x rust version), as well as a tool to set the active one, rustup is still probably recommended. Gyscos (talk) 19:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
What I meant was how the installation of rustup was done. The wiki currently recommends to install rustup via the sh script (via curl), but there is an AUR package of rustup. (The only thing is that self update doesn't work for tustup updates, you have to update from the AUR every time) --Cobrand
There was once an issue about making rustup more package manager-friendly. If rustup doesn't crash anymore when installed in a read-only location, then the AUR way looks good.
Can confirm, the behavior is the same when installed from curl or from the AUR (except rustup self update which does not work when installed from AUR ). Do you have any link concerning the issue where rustup crashed when installed in a read-only location ?
It was actually with the bash-based multirust, `multirust update` would try to self-update and stop there. If it's not a problem with rustup, perfect. Gyscos (talk) 20:12, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Features of the language

Do we really need to add the features of the language in this wiki ? Installation and configuration are a given because it is directly linked to the operating system, but the feature of the language can be looked up anywhere, especially on Rust's official website. I don't think the language features are fit for this page. --Cobrand

Right. Taking inspiration from the python page, a paragraph or two to have an overview of the language are useful, but a complete language description is outside the scope of this page. Gyscos (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Lower than C

"It is this integration with LLVM that allows Rust to obtain greater performance than equivalent C applications compiled with Clang, making Rust software designed with libcore lower level than C."

Than C, designed with what? The first claim seems to be about as popular as it is rarely backed up by anything and whatever ("equivalent applications...") or however that would be, but at least it makes some sense. I'm not sure I even understand the latter part though, could be clipped perhaps without losing much. Specific technical aspects for just as specific setups/platforms apart, it reads more like advertising mumbo jumbo, making something with y or z "lower level" than x is a nonstarter. Nor is low-level necessarily equal speed. In this case it's all about integration, this is how the section starts, it might as well stop there. Otherwise it's an invitation to misunderstanding as even C++ folks like to decry the fact of Rust not being transparent enough at lower levels. -Expo 98 (talk) 04:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)