> On 13 Dec 2019, at 09:26, ng0 <n...@n0.is> wrote: > I am not against Rust, or Go. The perspective of an application > developer is (usually) focused on other parts than the perspective > of someone who distributes and builds applications in a multi-OS > environment with more than one hardware.
Rust wants multi-archetecture multi-OS to work and continuously improves. Example: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2803 At the extreme, almost all Rust crate authors are sympathetic to no_std users, and some large Rust projects build no_std for WASM environments. I think the two biggest hurdles are cargo’s bug that leaks dev dependency features into real dependency features, and the churn in the Rust error traits. I’d think that goes beyond what gnunet requires. Go is ideologically opposed to the required conditional compilation features. Go devs just tell you to be rich and hire all your dependencies' devs, so that you can properly vendor those dependencies. Jeff p.s. Parity finished the initial migration of rust-libp2p and substrate over to Rust’s new futures and maybe some of the new async/await syntax. It’s definitely possible now to know what gnunet code should generally look like in Rust. It appears the “feud" between tokio and async-std creates some challenges for gnunet scale async code bases. I’m sure that’ll improve in 2020, but yeah there remains some uncertainty.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
