The aggressive replies on this thread. holy s**t.

That's what I mean when I say Rust community is toxic here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32105449

The comment would probably do better if it was phrased more like “Rust projects usually have lots of dependencies, and a lot of them have unhelpful names, and this is bad because XYZ”. This comment isn’t trying to offer constructive criticism or add to the discussion, it is just mocking rust and its users. The tone makes me a lot more likely to downvote it and move on rather than engaging in discussion.

For context, I totally agree that rust often ends up with more dependencies than I would like and that crate names are often super unhelpful, but I downvoted the comment.

Snottily states that the Rust community loves having too many dependencies and that the cutesy names are stroke-inducing. And you think the replies to that are aggressive?

Agreed. The Rust community took a disappointing direction in the past few years...

Serde is a common term meaning "serialization/deserialization," seems pretty descript to me.

You're saying it's "a common term", but I'd literally never heard it before a Rust library with this exact name appeared. Isn't this by any chance circular reasoning? That it became "a common term" because of this library? In that case you couldn't justify the name of the library by saying that it was "a common term" at that time.

My $0.02 - I've heard of it and I've never worked in Rust, though calling it "a common term" seems like a bit of a stretch - I was over 5 years into my career before I encountered it. It's much less common than analogous terms like modem ("modulator-demodulator").

I can assure you this Rust library did not invent the term

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=s...

Sadly all I'm constantly getting is "429. That’s an error."

This is a different namespace though. Nothing to do with data structures. Also, ends with an 's'.

But... what and how does it serialize/deserialize?

Approximately everything, but on its own nothing. Serde provides the framework and macros/annotations, serde_json is the "backend" implementing the actual json serialization.

Sure, it could be named serde_framwork and serde_json, but I think serde and serde_json isn't that bad either.

I don't mind the number of dependencies, but I agree that the cutesy naming is ridiculous and obfuscating

You're free to create your own project with your own name and have it compete on the free market for dominance. I don't get this criticism at all. Sure, it could be simpler, but it's A. Not your project, so who are you to say how to name it and B. Rust developers clearly understand what they're used for considering they're popular enough to be brought up here.

And unless you're actively developing in Rust, why would some other people's choice of naming their projects in a language and tool chain you don't ever plan on using be such a big deal?

You can say this about literally any criticism ever. I hate it and it blows chunks. It is the ultimate libertarian way of striking down any discussion: do not criticise, even in any small way, because it's a free market and you can just make another one, so never EVER even THINK of discussing anything.

I'm not saying that there should be some kind of totalitarian regime that enforces naming, I'm simply saying that yeah it kinda sucks that Rust devs tend towards cutesy names over ones that convey functionality.

This just seems like you're getting weirdly offended for no reason. Not everything is some kind of attack on individual agency. There is absolutely nothing wrong with me remarking on the state of Rust naming. The fact that you are conflating it to be a "big deal", which I never said it was, just seems like bad faith arguing me. This is just not something to get so offended over.

> I'm simply saying that yeah it kinda sucks that Rust devs tend towards cutesy names over ones that convey functionality.

Are you using Rust? If not, why does it matter what they choose to name their libraries. This is my entire point, you're coming in as an outsider criticizing something that is clearly not a problem to Rust devs.

If actual Rust developers are using them to the point where they're popular enough to gain (unwarranted, imo) criticism, then clearly they're working, silly name and all.

It's almost as if people care more about what the function a package provides rather than its name.

Why the hell one has to use Rust to comment on library name? Is there some license requirement for comments on Rust stuff? It's not like that people go on GitHub and tell authors that their project names are silly and need to be changed.

This is exactly cultish thing about Rust, that unless someone is praising Rust, they are free to keep their mouth shut.

I'm not an outsider, I have used rust before, though not extensively, not that this matters at all. An active rust developer has no more permission to criticise something about the rust ecosystem than someone new to rust

But it does matter. If the people actively using the packages aren't complaining, then there isn't really a problem.

You've hyperfocused so much on my "criticism of your criticism" and the permissibility behind it that you chose to ignore the actual criticism I laid down.

I'm not continuing this either way since I've said my piece. Maybe step back and actually read my comments rather than focusing on me criticizing your critique.

Also, pot calling the kettle black. You spent an entire comment being offended over my critique.

You probably shouldn't make such inflammatory comments on an account that is directly linked to your professional and personal profiles, it really doesn't look great

Also it isn't a criticism of my criticism, it is an assertion that I should not be allowed to criticise at all, which is a totally different thing. Of course I am going to call that out

EDIT: I can't reply because rate limited

Please calm down. I'm not threatening you. I'm simply surprised that you make such inflammatory and aggressive comments on an account that is so closely tied to your professional life, that is all. I think you should reconsider doing so

Oh so you jump to implicitly threatening those you disagree with? Wow. At least you made it clear how open you are to discussion and debate.

I never said you can't criticize. As the other commenter already said, you're allowed to critique but don't be surprised when your criticism is then critiqued itself. That's the epitome of modern discussions and debate.

I gave you examples of what you can do right now, aka making your own alternative packages, but you chose to ignore that all and double down on "don't you dare critique my criticism".

And then (I'm going to point this out again because it's so absurd) vaguely implied my comments would face professional retribution. Because I chose to disagree with you and make that public.

In any case, I said I'm stopping and I am. You should too, as you're already crossing several lines with this comment.

> do not criticise

Nobody said that. Of course you can criticize. But be aware that your criticism itself could be subject to criticism.

That's not really what's going on here though, because it isn't counter criticism, or a response to the criticism, but is instead simply "you shouldn't get to criticise"

Don't Rust crates go in a global namespace? In that case using up common or short names is definitely something I get to care about.

At the very least it would be nice if languages could separate the interface from weird (I guess the idea is that they should be fun?) library names.