exhaustive VS teloxide

This is an analyzer that will catch this: https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive

I believe it's in golangci-lint.

I agree linters in general are quite useful for Go though. The default suite from golangci-lint is quite good. I would also recommend enabling exhaustive if you're working with a codebase that uses "enums" (full disclosure, I contributed a bit to that project).

there’s a linter for exhaustive matching: https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive

I tried to find that linter and found this: exhaustive

And in Go you'd use a linter, like this one.

this is AST go vet analyzer that performs just that: https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive (too bad it can not do struct based enums..)

>> the main thing missing from Go is ADT's. After using these in Rust and Swift, a programming language doesn't really feel complete without them

What are the differences between an ADT (plus pattern matching i’d reckon?) in Rust/Swift vs the equiv in Go (tagged interfaces + switch statement)?

One has exhaustive matching at compile time, the other has a default clause (non exhaustive matching), although there’s an important nub here with respect to developer experience; it would be idiomatic in Go to use static analysis tooling (e.g. Rob Pike is on record saying that various checks - inc this one - don’t belong in the compiler and should live in go vet). I’ve been playing with Go in a side project and using golint-ci which invokes https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive - net result, in both go and rust, i get a red line of text annotated at the switch in vscode if i miss a case.

Taking a step back, there isn’t a problem you can solve with one that you can’t solve with the other, or is there?

To take a step further back, why incomplete?

Use a linter.

For an exhaustive linter, were you referring to this? It looks pretty nice. If it's possible to check this with static analysis, is it something that could be in the compiler itself in the future?

https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive

here, have fun. You’re gonna write some tests, make new types to satisfy interfaces for testing, and then wind up with branches for your test paths in your live code, but go for it, I guess. You know everything! I am but a simple blubbite, too dim, too dim to get it.

I'm using teloxide, which is a crate for building Telegram bots. I have a small Telegram bot running on my Raspberry Pi, and since it's very slow to compile, I'm trying to cross compile it from my Windows machine, with no luck.

I do completely agree with your advice of using `Arc`s. But unfortunately, sometimes it gets very tedious to deal with all these `Arc`s: https://github.com/teloxide/teloxide/blob/ec1d41220c51872cf9....

It also blurs the advantage of Rust as a lifetime validation tool if you use reference counting anyways. But it seems that it's the only viable approach for async at the moment.

A Telegram bot built with Rust Telegram bot framework Teloxide, used to provide support to new users discovering our network, and to help them navigate through our channels of information by using various commands to interact with and find a job as fast as possible without need for visiting /jobs page from our website.

There is https://github.com/teloxide/teloxide though, maybe there is a confusion? It's actively maintained?

This is prototype and we plan to include more features. The bot is built with Rust Teloxide framework and we plan to deploy more Rust code for our production code, web pages and end points.

We also built a Telegram bot with Rust Teloxide framework and will deploy this week and show that is is written in Rust also.

Working on teloxide, a Telegram bots framework for Rust.

As was said earlier, for visibility purposes, gRPC client is also a Telegram bot. To implement the bot, teloxide library was used.

You can also make some social media bots with Rust