In Python's defense, this was not obvious at the time; my understanding is Rust came to this approach by looking at the experience of Python and other languages. When Python's standard library was first being written, there were no easy package managers for any language, and the normal thing to do for installing dependencies in e.g. C was to grab random tarballs and figure out how to build and deploy them yourself. So avoiding that process made perfect sense.
Obviously it doesn't apply to everyone, and it certainly doesn't apply to most startups or open source developers, but I spent most of the last 20 years working in environments where you have to get permission for every third party library you bring on to the network. Many networks were essentially "airgapped", so it's not like you could just ignore the rules. The bureaucratic process alone meant that we preferred large bundles like Anaconda or Qt. Trying to use Cargo as it is typically used and documented would be a complete non-starter.
Situations like this will really make you appreciate "batteries included". I think this particular issue is fairly revealing of the attitudes common among programmers of different languages. I think it's a good thing to be skeptical of a program pulling in a bunch of standard libraries over the Internet. It worries me when I find something on Github I want to try and I can't download and compile it without it pulling in 30 or 100 other libraries that I haven't looked at or decided to trust come along for the ride. I don't like that way of doing software, and unfortunately it's the norm in node and starting to become a norm in Rust as well. Real security fails have been caused this way in node's case at least.
Even in cases when Python programs depend on external libraries, I usually don't need to use pip for anything because Python programs will pull in dependencies provided by your distribution just fine. (My distribution doesn't even have any Rust libraries, so even if dynamic linking is possible in Rust not many people are shipping software that way.)
"Download by default" is a worse way of doing things, and it makes me sad to see newer languages like Go and Rust embracing it.
We do have an internal PyPI mirror (with devpi) and we point `pip` at that, and it works pretty well.
(Pointing at an internal mirror is now stable. Setting up that mirror is the hard part.)
So Rust can get away more easily without having support for things like command line parsing in the standard library, because it isn't really trying to support situations where it would be inconvenient to give your program its own project directory and Cargo.toml and all.
If it really matters, then do it right (in whatever language makes the most sense).
Wasn't perl's CPAN developed around that time period (mid '90s) ?
Yes it does. Perhaps you're thinking of browser JS, which does not.
Edit: based off of all the replies below, everyone understands the validity of what I'm trying to say, but also have fortunately pointed out my admittedly grevious error of not knowing you can just import hashmap from stdlib. The extra step is pretty minimal and not a problem. I'm hoping this is covered in the Rust book.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.HashMap.htm... https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.BTreeMap.ht...
use std::iter::FromIterator;
BTreeMap::from_iter(hash_map.into_iter()) for (k,v) in &src
{ dst.insert(k,v); }
?That being said the point still stands, I remember specifically feeling it at the lack of included regex. I overall prefer the slim std lib of rust over the massive python though. Especially with the community being pretty good about nominating de facto standard packages like for regex.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.HashMap.htm...
I didn't know it was included in stdlib (I really thought it wasn't) and feel idiotic now. It is still odd (having a primarily scripting background and not coming from the systems side) that I have to include what seems to be essentially an import statement at the top. I guess it is a lot more efficient that way though. Thanks for pointing out my error!
Had I been using Java or Visual Basic or even C++ proirly maybe I wouldn't be so impressed as I were.
I think the mistake Python is doing is messing with it's simplicity with decorations, halfass lambdas and stuff. As a newbie you could understand Python code, while eg. C++ templates were magic. You need to know more Python to understand Python code nowadays.
There are other new stuff that might be confusing to beginners (like our mighty walrus operator), but those two examples have been there for effectively forever.