Speaking of making it, actix-web is a good web framework. While Rust has “made it” in many senses, it has not quite yet in many others, and so I think this produces a fundamental anxiety in the community. This setup creates a gnawing fear in the back of people’s minds: what if some foundational package uses unsafe, but uses it incorrectly? What happens when this causes problems for every package that uses that package? This relationship between safe and unsafe is also a bit hard to understand, and so, when bugs are found around unsafe, people outside of Rust often use it to suggest that all of Rust is a house of cards. It not only found a few places where there were bugs, but also a few places where the restrictions were too tight!īut “generally” is doing a lot of work in that previous sentence.
#Actix tutorial code#
Several folks are in the process of providing tooling to prove that your unsafe code is correct, and provided proofs for a bunch of the standard library’s unsafe code. This premise is treated skeptically by many, but has generally been demonstrated to have worked out. Interacting with anything outside of the language, for example, using the operating system to print to the screen, or write a file, has to be unsafe, and so without this property, all programs would be unsafe. But one of the things that’s important about it is that, since unsafe means “I have checked this code, and it upholds all of the guarantees the compiler cannot check,” you can build a safe interface with unsafe guts. This is a really important part of Rust, but also a very dangerous one, hence the name. Rust has a necessary feature, unsafe, that allows you to escape Rust’s guarantees. Can we reject the idea of a BDFL? Can we include as many people as possible? Can we be welcoming to folks who historically have not had great representation in open source? Can we reject contempt culture? Can we be inclusive of beginners? But Rust has been an experiment in community building as much as an experiment in language building. Of course, people are also people, and so this wasn’t perfect we’ve made several fairly large mis-steps here over the years. From the earliest days, leadership explicitly took the position that it wasn’t just the code, but the people around the project were important. It’s been very clear from the beginning that the Rust project saw Rust as more than just the language. Because this isn’t really about playing judge. I’m going to give you account of this story as I remember it and as I felt it. I’m not going to link to a dozen citations, or try to prove that I’m some sort of neutral party here. Today is the first day where I say to myself, okay, has that happened?
When Rust was a tiny, tiny community, I thought to myself, “wow, I wonder how long this will last? Probably 1.0 will kill it.” Sort of playing off of Eternal September, I assumed that over time, the community would grow, and we’d encounter problems.