once_self_cell VS rust

This issue says "Migrate code to use self_cell instead." That page says "It has undergone community code review from experienced Rust users." Looking at the review, issues were found and fixed earlier on, but my interpretation of the end of the thread is more that folks stopped responding with concerns, so confidence is now assumed but still not proven. The same was true of most (all?) other crates trying to solve the same problem, until enough people did find the unsoundness holes unique to each crate.

I've come across the zip example bevor, and even considered adding support for mutable access to the owner here https://github.com/Voultapher/self_cell/pull/36. See the last comment why I decided not to pursue this. Looking at the specific example, really what is the purpose of storing the lazy ZipReader result? IMO that's bit of bad design on the part of the zip crate. The stdlib APIs consume reader, allowing you to abstract over creation logic. If what you need to store, needs further pre-processing, why not pull that out? Specifically here, what is the point of having a self-referential struct that contains an owner ZipArchive that you will no longer be allowed to mutate. And a lazy reader ZipReader that you can then use to really read the file? If you need to abstract over the construction logic you could return (ZipArchive, Box ZipReader>), if you want to return the content you can return (ZipArchive, Vec) allowing further use of ZipArchive.

As the author of self_cell I can attest, that writing unsafe lifetime abstractions is exceedingly tricky and you will get it wrong, repeatedly. I'm not sure these problems in owning_ref can be solved without a serious overhaul of the API. For one it tracks too little information, both ouroboros and self_cell independently reached the conclusion that you have to mark the dependent as either covariant or not_covariant over the owner lifetime, and prohibit ever leaking direct references if the dependent is not_covariant. But the fun doesn't stop there, if the owner can have a lifetime too, things get extra tricky. If you want to dive deeper take a look at this discussion https://github.com/Voultapher/self_cell/pull/29.

Grouping the source and derived AST in the same struct without leaking the lifetime is something that greatly helped keep the API sane. Shameless plug https://github.com/Voultapher/self_cell

Thanks, I'll incorporate that into https://github.com/Voultapher/once_self_cell/issues/5

If you haven't dipped your touch-typing fingers into Rust yet, you really owe it to yourself. Rust is a modern programming language with features that make it suitable not only for systems programming -- its original purpose, but just about any other environment, too; there are frameworks that let your build web services, web applications including user interfaces, software for embedded devices, machine learning solutions, and of course, command-line tools. Since a custom GitHub Action is essentially a command-line tool that interacts with the system through files and environment variables, Rust is perfectly suited for that as well.

Here's an example of someone citing a disagreement between CRT and shell32:

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44650

This in addition to the Rust CVE mentioned elsewhere in the thread which was rooted in this issue:

https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/04/09/cve-2024-24576.html

Here are some quick programs to test contrasting approaches. I don't have examples of inputs where they parse differently on hand right now, but I know they exist. This was also a problem that was frequently discussed internally when I worked at MSFT.

    #include 

> instead of choosing a certain numbered version of the random library (if I remember correctly) I let cargo download the latest version which had a completely different API.

Yeah, they didn't follow the instructions and got burned. I still think that multiple things went wrong simultaneously for that experience. I wonder if more prevalent uses of `#[doc(alias = "name")]` being leveraged by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120730 (which now that I check only accounts for methods and not functions, I should get on that!) so that when changing APIs around people at least get a slightly better experience.

Almost fixed the compiler: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123325

Rust: A secure, efficient, and modern programming language (omitting ten thousand words). You can simply follow the installation instructions provided on the official website.

Recently did something similar in Rust but for generating SVGs. We've adopted it for snapshot testing of cargo and rustc's output. Don't have a good PR handy for showing Github's rendering of changes in the SVG (text, side-by-side, swiping) but https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121877/files has newly added SVGs.

To see what is supported, see the screenshot in the docs: https://docs.rs/anstyle-svg/latest/anstyle_svg/

We strongly believe in Rust as a powerful language for building production-grade software, especially for systems like ours that run alongside Kubernetes.

The above Assert<{N % 2 == 1}> requires #![feature(generic_const_exprs)] and the nightly toolchain. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76560 for more info.