Iron VS just

I've written many things using Iron and it's been fine. It's not particularly developed any more but I am not aware of any major outstanding issues.

I don't miss the time when we basically only had Iron

iron

There're many web framework in rust, such as SergioBenitez/Rocket , actix/actix-web ,poem-web/poem , iron/iron . How do I chiose, anyone suggestion？

I'm not sure which definition of backend you are thinking of here. In case you simply mean "server side", here are a couple of libraries that might be of use: iron - been a while since I used it, used it for a couple smaller projects rocket (nightly only) - no personal experience, but a lot of people seem to like it diesel - a bit complex to wrap your head around, but once you get the idea it's really nice. Definitely check out the examples.

it's taken by a web framework https://github.com/iron/iron

Your comment touches on a few misconceptions I see a lot.

Firstly, `reqwest` exposes both an async and a synchronous API, allowing the developer to choose which one to use. They are largely interchangeable code-wise. [1]

Secondarily, and more broadly, async is possible to opt out of. You must understand that most web and network related libraries will be async by default for performance, because people who write in Rust and people who write web servers typically care greatly about performance. This is the intersection of those two groups. That being said, there are options outside of that ecosystem. [2]

If you truly want to use an asynchronous library without migrating your application to run entirely on an async runtime like tokio, you can run it inside of a synchronous function without much trouble. I've put together a playground link for you. [3]

1. https://docs.rs/reqwest/0.11.2/reqwest/blocking/index.html

2. Iron: https://github.com/iron/iron

There are several web frameworks for Rust: Rocket, Actix, Warp, Iron - but only Actix has released a stable 1.0 release, and there has been considerable controversy over how it uses unsafe Rust.

just - https://github.com/casey/just

Welp there is absolute chaos in that thread -- guess it's not an April Fools joke.

I wonder if relying on CI for anything other than provisioning machines is a mistake -- maybe we should have never moved from doing things from local scripts written in $LANGUAGE.

That said, I'm probably biased since I'm a massive fan of things like `make` and more appropriately for the current age, `just`[0]

[0]: https://github.com/casey/just

> When a command has some cognitive requirements I create a script with some ${1:-default} values and I store them all in $PATH enabled local/bin

I would consider using just for this:

https://github.com/casey/just

Your coworker's experience is more principled: Make is a mediocre tool for executing commands. It wasn't ever designed for that. Although it is pretty common to see what you are mentioning in projects because it doesn't require installing a dependency.

For a repo where an easy to install (single binary) dependency is a non-issue, consider using just. [1] You get `just -l` where you can see all the command available, the ability to use different languages, and overall simpler command writing.

[1] https://github.com/casey/just

This is fantastic, but I'd say that this solution is somewhat in response to this open issue from 2019:

https://github.com/casey/just/issues/429

I really wish just was included as a package in distributions.

So far, I didn't work on new features at all but on stabilizing the ground for further development: 1. CMake lists and modules were rewritten a lot, now managing builds and their configurations is much lesser pain. 2. Brought in Justfile for regular tasks, and it's great, no less. 3. Linters, formatters, analyzers for almost all the code (except for Janet for now, as because of it being a niche and young technology, it didn't get enough attention yet). 4. ECS stub. Now runtime class doesn't look like a god object. 5. Started writing unit tests which didn't happen with my personal projects before and maybe indicates how serious am I about this one :D 6. Some of previously hardcoded data has been moved to INI files. Now, if I release the game in 10 years, and in 10 more years some eccentric person decides to make a variant of it, it will be slightly simpler.

i've grown to like this for my personal projects. https://github.com/casey/just

Reminds me of `just`. Which I love.

https://github.com/casey/just

In my example above, I installed the developer tool "Just" as a Dev Container feature. I could also install it by adding the install script to my Dockerfile. However, I would have to build my own Dockerfile and would have to maintain this piece of code myself. This Dev Container Feature works on different architectures and base images, which makes them convenient to use.

One primary design goal togomak had from the beginning was concurrency. All tasks run concurrently, unless a `depends_on` argument is mentioned. `just` didn't support that when I was initially building togomak, but there is a feature coming in soon which I am looking forward to: https://github.com/casey/just/pull/1562 .

While I was building togomak, I read through Dagger [1], Earthly [2], Concourse CI [3], Jest and Make along with the stuff I was already working with - Jenkins, GitHub actions and GitLab CI. Dagger [1] is really great, I like its design - it supports writing pipelines in Python, Typescript, Go and a few more languages. togomak tries to abstract away a lot of it. Such as dependency management (in the case of python, the requirement of a python interpreter, and its package managers, etc). togomak is just a single statically-linked binary.

[1]: https://dagger.io/