There is a wiki page at
clap repo with brief comparison between
Maybe it will answer your questions.
There is a wiki page at
lazy_static at least until we get better CTFE. This crate seems to creep into most of my projects.
So lazy_static it is.
I hereby declare the nominations for week 39 open. Perhaps we can rid ourselves of the tradition of winning last-minute nominations this time?
And it’s Thursday and we don’t have any nominations! Come on, people! Don’t leave me hanging here.
You could always go back through the older nominations that didn’t get chosen for that particular week. It seems like crates tend to get nominated once, then never again.
Aside: come to think of it, the forum structure itself is a rather poor way of organising this. For example, there are several crates that don’t have their own post, so you can’t vote for them directly. You can’t “reset” votes for each week, nor can you tell how long ago the last vote was made (maybe a crate almost qualified for CoTW status a while ago, but is no longer relevant?).
Anyway, going through the backlog and checking the TWiR posts, I’d say … well actually, I’ll put it in a separate post so it can be voted for independently of the above rambling.
quickcheck. “Automatic property based testing with shrinking.”
It helps write property-based tests: you define some property and how to test it, and quickcheck feeds your test random inputs as it tries to narrow down the ranges within which the property fails to hold. Handy when the set of possible test cases is very large.
what about the good old https://crates.io/crates/rand ?
Maybe keep a list of nominated packages, and every week create a survey using Google Forms, letting people cast a vote for a whole week (while in the meantime, accept more projects for a next voting).
Once a project wins, it should be moved to a special list of weekly winners. Project that did not win, stay in the pool of candidates).
This nominating and voting would be great to integrate into Crates.io. Then crates’ pages could have more to say than just stats and links. I’d be willing to help with the planning and implementation. Would an RFC be a good starting point?
As useful as many of them are, I don’t think Rust-lang crates make good nominations since I assume this whole process is to help community works get their time in the spotlight, especially the lesser-known ones.
For modifying crates.io I’d recommend starting out with some discussion (e.g. an issue, forum thread, etc), although an RFC probably isn’t quite the right location for it. After that it should be relatively straightforward to implement on crates.io!
This websocket library seems to be of high quality and well documented: https://crates.io/crates/ws
It’s my nomination for next week.
I’d like to nominate http://nalgebra.org for next week.
Last week I tried being quiet about the COTW, and only got few nominations and no votes. That’s why I decided to write about itertools instead. However, for this week, I’d like to return to the “I nag you folks, and you nominate and vote” model we had previously, so here’s the first part of it. Now it’s your turn to supply the other parts.
I’ll vote for octavo, a great alternative to rust-crypto that is actively maintained and pretty clean.
It’s not pure rust but sodiumoxide is also a pretty nice crypto library (bindings to libnacl).
Out of the two offerings so far (sodiumoxide being the other), I have to say I prefer octavo because I can get it to build on Windows.
Octavo is still not ready as a crypto library. And for very long time it wont be. Trust me, I’m an author.