News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust vs. Go by dbaupp on Wednesday January 18, 2017 @08:36PM (#13432210)
Cargo doesn't require that you use things from crates.io without vetting them. It's possible to, say, write everything yourself, or only use specific crates that you've decided are good (whether that's by reading the source, or only using the ones published by the Rust developers, or some other criteria) and even go as far as explicit pinning to specific versions of them in your manifest (although this isn't particularly necessary: Cargo pins versions by default, and won't upgrade without you explicitly asking for it).
Re:Rust vs. Go by mook on Thursday January 19, 2017 @02:03AM (#13433734)
The problem really is that you have to vet them at all. With golang's standard library, it's all going to be supported to some degree. (I believe the same happens with rust's standard library, it's just much smaller.)

Basically, some people like having a curated library set; others do fine without and are happy to find things to use. The former set doesn't like rust as much in its current state.

Re:Rust vs. Go by pcwalton on Thursday January 19, 2017 @03:45AM (#13434173)
We have the Rust nursery as a curated library set.
Re:Rust vs. Go by dbaupp on Thursday January 19, 2017 @02:53AM (#13433940)
The crates published by the Rust developers themselves seem quite similar to the standard library for this purpose. (But, yes, things like this are not as discoverable as they should be; it is one of many things people are working on.)