Relatively crude tools like `run rust` or `rustx<https://github.com/killerswan/rustx/blob/master/build/rustx>` go a long way, but they're not a substitute for properly learning the module system or for having a good REPL handy. It seems silly to bin an experimental feature out of the fear that the number one request of new users exploring the language will, itself, scare them away.
Maybe for now just stick in a warning when it starts up: "RUSTI IS STILL AN EXPERIMENTAL BETA FEATURE! If you have a problem, try our more reliable `rust run`, instead. And volunteers are needed! :D" Kevin -- Kevin Cantu On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Thad Guidry <[email protected]> wrote: > RUST RUN. FTW. :-) > > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 4:29 PM, John Clements > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> On May 29, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Graydon Hoare wrote: >> >> ... >> > >> > I agree that a 'rust run' command, or indeed exploiting our support for >> > shebang comments[1], should be sufficient for most users. But I'm not >> > convinced the repl serves no purpose, yet (though it's true, I don't use >> > seem to ever use it; I also write surprisingly little rust code these >> > days). People ask for it, and it doesn't really bend the language any to >> > support it. It _is_ a code-maintenance cost, of course, so I'm also >> > curious what others think in terms of the balance of costs/benefits. >> >> My vote: dump it. This might sound surprising from a Schemer, but >> probably not from a Racketeer. Making the top-level work correctly soaked >> up far too much time in the Racket environment. There's nothing more >> infuriating than getting something to work in the REPL and then discovering >> that it doesn't work in compiled code… unless it's struggling for weeks to >> get something to work in the REPL, only to discover that it works just fine >> in compiled code. >> >> I think that the principal use case for a REPL is interactive exploration >> of what rust programs mean, and I think that the best way to support this >> is to have a nice clean "rust run", and possibly some sugar that makes >> evaluating and printing the result of a single expression more convenient. >> >> My opinion only. >> >> John >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rust-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >> > > > > -- > -Thad > http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry > > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
