Much more of the standard library could have been available for lower-level use. There could have been a collections and io library usable without those design decisions, etc. It was a very explicit design decision to have such lackluster low-level stdlib and ecosystem support.
You don't have to. Whoever is packaging apps for the dist will also package dependency libs or static link them, & devs can just grab & build the source for libs they want.
-
-
Overall though apps should be using very few libs. Stdlib should cover most basic data structure needs. Without huge resources it's impossible to assess correctness of more than a handful of libs.
-
That's a value judgement, not an objective one. Rust's stdlib covers basic data structure needs and there's still enormous value in fine-grained packaging (though I would never go as far as what happens in npm, or admittedly, in some domains in Rust, too.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No, this is not how it works. Applications often have dozens or hundreds dependencies when we count transitive. It's totally insane and error prone to repackage them all, duplicate versions resolution etc.
-
Apps with that any deps are simply unfixably buggy. Even if a randomly chosen lib has 95% chance of being usably nonbuggy, 100 have < 1% chance.
-
i fully agree with that statement, but sadly things like browsers, desktop environments, window managers, ... don't come <50 dependencies anymore. I know its bad, but sadly also the reallity.
-
Then fix it. Don't model new ecosystems after the badness of existing ones.
-
FWIW the current situation is somewhat distorted by Xorg's ridiculous overfactoring. ~22/55 libs my xfwm4 uses are just a bunch of core X components.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Grabing and building the source files for libs, by hand, is like installing packages for your OS by hand. I don't want to extract archives and find how to build for 30 or 50 libraries…
-
Ecosystems where you need 30-40 libs for an app are ecosystems where the apps are hopelessly buggy.
-
[citation needed]
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.