this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
17 points (100.0% liked)

Rust Lang

148 readers
1 users here now

Rules [Developing]

Observe our code of conduct

Constructive criticism only

No endless relitigation

No low-effort content

No memes or image macros

No NSFW Content

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/1825728

Lots of new features!

Thought I should share this with those who don't use users.rust-lang.org. Note: I'm not affiliated with lib.rs, I'm only reposting to lemmy.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Its too bad they closed sourced the site. I really like the way it makes exploring crates easy, but after major devs having their crates removed Im very hesistant to use it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Neat! And for anyone not familiar Lib.rs is ~~a package repository, described as~~ an alternative [frontend] to Crates.io.

[–] Vorpal 2 points 1 year ago

Not really: lib.rs is a different website frontend to the same old crates.io, presenting the data in a better way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

lib.rs has a pretty UI, but the dev kinda sucks, and after the latest controversies, using it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Crates.io is good enough.

[–] Vorpal 1 points 1 year ago

The drama sucks, agreed. But crates.io is lightyears behind in design, search and features.

For example: Lib.rs has the first thing I want to know (when was the last release, is this still developed?) right at the top. For crates.io that is hidden near the bottom, especially on mobile.

Also: Lib.rs has search that actually works and finds relevant things, I cannot say that for crates.io.

I would love for crates.io to take (some) inspiration from lib.rs.

Finally: I share the lib.rs author's opinion on cryptocurrency, though I don't agree with his extreme measures. (If it was me I would put a note in neutral tone that crypto is problematic for the environment on the relevant categories and crates, with some links to more into, then leave it at that.) So using lib.rs despite the drama doesn't bother me that much.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Hey, maybe this will actually lead to standardization of feature documentation? It's been in terrible shape for years. The fact that optional dependencies and features have been treated nearly the same by cargo, but treated differently by crates.io, makes it useless for discovering features for crates. Up until now, my go-to method is to examine the Cargo.toml file directly, and if I can't figure out what a feature does there I look directly at the source code.