papers VS foundation.rust-lang.org

What's fun is, because everything is decided in papers, we can find out why! https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/884

Accepted paper here: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p20...

> The proposed std::print function improves usability, avoids allocating a temporary std::string object and calling operator<< which performs formatted I/O on text that is already formatted. The number of function calls is reduced to one which, together with std::vformat-like type erasure, results in much smaller binary code (see § 13 Binary code).

Additionally,

> Another problem is formatting of Unicode text:

> std::cout << "Привет, κόσμος!";

> If the source and execution encoding is UTF-8 this will produce the expected output on most GNU/Linux and macOS systems. Unfortunately on Windows it is almost guaranteed to produce mojibake despite the fact that the system is fully capable of printing Unicode

See https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/557

Bringing editions to C++ failed, and I am not aware of anyone trying to tackle the issues https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/631

(I could be wrong though! I follow the committee more than you may guess, but not as much as to think I know everything about what's going on.)

GitHub would not be relevant in this respect because:

* It's owned by a (single) commercial corporation, Microsoft.

* There is censorship both by content and in some respects by country of origin.

* The code is closed.

but otherwise it's an interesting idea.

The C++ standardization committee uses GitHub to track papers submitted to them, see:

https://github.com/cplusplus/papers

There was no non-approval. The facility needs more work, and the authors (and the committee) were focusing on getting print/format done first. I hope that the paper will be worked on again in the future. We will be happy to review it once there is a revision (see github for history)

For more details on what we did at the 2023-06 Varna meeting, the [GitHub issue](https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/328) associated with the paper has a summary.

You subscribe to the Github issue of the proposal: https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues

Through the Fast Forward program, we give free services and support to open source projects and the nonprofits that support them. We support many of the world’s top programming languages (like Python, Rust, Ruby, and the wonderful Scratch), foundational technologies (cURL, the Linux kernel, Kubernetes, OpenStreetMap), and projects that make the internet better and more fun for everyone (Inkscape, Mastodon, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Terms of Service; Didn’t Read).

This is why some of the bigger programming languages have a consortium behind them, dedicated to maintaining the language and making decisions for its continued improvement. When you look at the logos at the bottom of the Rust Foundation page, you can see some pretty big names.

The Rust foundation, which is a nonprofit general (delaware) corporation with bylaws, employees, a normal legal existence. It owns the trademarks and domain names, acts as a legal and administrative point of contact when one is needed, and has I think operational and funding responsibility for infrastructure (crates.io, CI, etc.) The foundation has members which are almost all corporate sponsors who donate money (and sometimes people) to further its mandate. There's a fairly broad set of companies involved here: Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta, Huawei, etc. etc.

When you say enterprise, who do you mean? Rust is absolutely being pushed by faang et al for example. Just look at the bottom of the Rust foundation page[0]. You do not see this support for things like Nim or Julia[1].

[0] https://foundation.rust-lang.org/

The Rust language is supported by the Rust Foundation, more details on that website. Financial donors to the Rust Foundation are about 30-40 companies currently, the bigger ones include Mozilla, Google, Microsoft, AWS, and Meta

> https://foundation.rust-lang.org/ 15,000

With all due respect, they don't need this money. Rust is a great project, and deserving, but they already have plenty of sponsors.

I would have rather seen 150 x $100 go to smaller projects. So much great software is being written, by people who are barely scraping by, and even $100 could be the motivation for someone to finish something widely useful.

So, let's clarify a couple things first about how the Rust and Cargo crates work. First off, there is no single company or entity who's the sole contributor to the core Rust tooling. Rust is an open source project to which anyone can view the codebase and contribute (though there's a select set of people who are responsible for approving changes to it and managing releases). It's worth noting this doesn't mean there isn't an organization responsible for the project however. The Rust Foundation are a non-profit who manages the core repositories and tooling, and is also responsible for setting high level goals for the language.

I don't think it is the same as Java. There is no single company owning Rust. Several big companies are investing in rust foundation (https://foundation.rust-lang.org/) including Google in particular which had quite a story regarding Java.

Recently, several big techs like Google, Microsoft, Mozilla and Amazon jointly launched a non-profit organization to help the language maintain itself by giving full support to the maintainers who lead and develop the project. Here at Vaultree we use Rust in our product and services, as we need to deliver data with reliability and agility to our customers, as we are in a business line where any error or inaccuracy can be costly, the adoption of Rust was a great fit for us.