matrix-static VS hmatrix

Just a note to say that if you are using Matrix and want your conversations to be indexed in search engine ("Google-searchable"), you can deploy matrix-static[1] or you can use the live instance hosted by the Matrix foundation[2].

I think an interesting comparison, for both Linen and Matrix, would be to compare these 2 approaches: Linen natively indexed conversation and this Matrix "static" client. I would be especially interested by what additional features Linen provides in term of indexing compared to this static client.

[1]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-static

Two things that might help Rust a lot despite the complexity is the tooling and the ecosystem. Cargo is good, the compiler is extremely helpful, and there are a lot of crates to build on for all sorts of tasks.

For example, if I need to use simulated annealing to solve an optimization problem, there already exist libraries that implement that algorithm well.[1] Unfortunately, the Haskell library for this seems to be unmaintained[2] and so does the OCaml library that I can find.[3] Similarly, Agda, Idris, and Lean 4 all seem like great languages. But not having libraries for one's tasks is a big obstacle to adoption.

Nim looks very promising. (Surprisingly so to me.) Hopefully they will succeed at gaining wider recognition and growing a healthy ecosystem.

[1] E.g., https://github.com/argmin-rs/argmin

[2] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/hmatrix-gsl-0.19.0.1 was released in 2018. (Although there are newer commits in the GitHub repo, https://github.com/haskell-numerics/hmatrix. Not too sure what is going on.)

[3] https://github.com/khigia/ocaml-anneal

hmatrix covers the essentials; less feature-complete than python/matlab, partly because several orders of magnitudes less people use it, partly because it's meant as the "essential core".