News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applications with Rust. Parent comment

Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by carllerche on Monday April 27, 2020 @05:18PM (#23000155)
We're aiming for 1.0 by Q3 2020. I wrote a bit about it here: https://tokio.rs/blog/2019-11-tokio-0-2/#a-roadmap-to-1-0 That said, io_uring may end up impacting that target by a little bit.

I understand the sentiment re v1. In reality, Tokio v0.1 was pretty much 1.0. We never cut 1.0 because async/await was in the works and it was unclear when it would be released. Now that async/await is out, 0.2 was a big change. We need some time to stabilize our APIs and collect user feedback. This process is happening now and going well.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by carlmr on Monday April 27, 2020 @06:07PM (#23000665)
As someone who has dabbled in Rust, I think the Rustaceans are just too careful to bump something up to v1 before it's near perfect. In other languages the package ecosystem looks more mature because people are less careful in bumping up numbers.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by carllerche on Monday April 27, 2020 @06:16PM (#23000760)
You aren't wrong. In hindsight, we should have shipped 1.0 a year or so after v0.1. I don't think we can ship 2.0 now. v0.3 is going to happen soon to fix errors in v0.2. async/await in Rust is very new. We are still figuring things out.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by naasking on Monday April 27, 2020 @06:59PM (#23001171)
I'm sure they look more mature, but they might leave a bad impression. Rust already has "bad PR" with the borrow checker, so libraries being more conservative before bumping versions might work in its favour. Otherwise you might get a bad impression from the language and apparently immature libraries.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by larntz on Monday April 27, 2020 @07:41PM (#23001562)
For me the borrow checker is what I find interesting about rust.

I wouldn't call it bad pr.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by naasking on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @12:08AM (#23003265)
The people talking about it generally complain about it. Those comfortable with it generally aren't talking about it. I don't know what else to call that than bad PR. Just the nature of the beast.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by michael_j_ward on Monday April 27, 2020 @09:18PM (#23002259)
Have you discussed elsewhere about io_uring plans? It isn't mentioned at all in the linked roadmap
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by carllerche on Monday April 27, 2020 @09:57PM (#23002530)
We are still figuring that out. When I wrote that post, uring was not yet working with sockets. Things have changed. We are exploring the space.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tokio: Runtime for writing reliable asynchronous applicat... by andrenth on Monday April 27, 2020 @09:55PM (#23002512)
Is there anywhere I can read about the plans for io_uring integration?
[ Parent | on HN ]