reqwest VS rfcs

> If you are equally picky and constrain yourself to parts of the ecosystem which care about binary size, you still have more options and can avoid size issues.

What's an example of this for, say, libcurl? On my system it has a tiny number of recursive dependencies, around a dozen. [0] Furthermore if I want to write a C program that uses libcurl I have to download zero bytes of data ... because it's a shared library that is already installed on my system, since so many programs already use it.

I don't really know the appropriate comparison for Rust. reqwest seems roughly comparable, but it's an HTTP client library, and not a general purpose network client like curl. Obviously curl can do a lot more. Even the list of direct dependencies for reqwest is quite long [1], and it's built on top of another http library [2] that has its own long list of dependencies, a list that includes tokio, no small library itself.

In terms of final binary size, the installed size of the curl package on my system, which includes both the command line tool and development dependencies for libcurl, is 1875.03 KiB.

[0] I'm excluding the dependency on the ca-certificates package, since this only provides the certificate chain for TLS and lots of programs rely on it.

[1] https://crates.io/crates/reqwest/0.11.24/dependencies

[2] https://crates.io/crates/hyper/0.14.28/dependencies

ReductStore was rewritten from C++ to Rust a few months ago. We are delighted to be part of the Rust community and have taken a new step towards Rust with the Client SDK. The SDK is powered by reqwest and enables asynchronous integration of the database into Rust applications:

From what I could turn up when googling the specific error lines (here), it has something to do with the crate mio not having support for WASM, but I don’t understand what’s being said on this thread.

You can use the tauri-plugin-deep-link crate to register your app as a protocol handler. After you get your code, you can exchange it for an auth token in the same manner as the Electron guide, but for Rust you can use reqwest for the HTTP call.

When starting out, we made some design decisions at the backend. The decision will allow us to independently test the service without interfering with the real application using a term called integration testing. We'll utilize two "dev" packages: reqwest and fake. Dev dependencies only get introduced into your application in development or during testing. In production, they are not included:

It's possible, you will want to use crates like https://docs.rs/reqwest/ to download the page and https://docs.rs/scraper/ to extract elements from the page.

Rust allows me to mainly only run the application to confirm things work from a business perspective.

For people starting out building stuff in rust - understand that there is a distinction of async code and libraries and can lead to confusing compiler errors if you don't realize there is a distinction. It's simple in hindsight but did cause me to waste hours barking up the wrong trees at first. Other wise just learn about `match` and Result/Option types asap, they're fundamental.

https://github.com/http-rs/tide tide is great to create an http server / routes

https://github.com/djc/askama I use this to template out HTML and it checks all my boxes, dynamic data, passing in functions, control flow.

https://github.com/launchbadge/sqlx sql interface for a variety of backend, async safe.

https://github.com/seanmonstar/reqwest http client to make requests

Rust is amazing, don't let the initial few speed bumps discourage you - building real things with rust is no more challenging today than any other modern language stack.

Is there any this month in reqwest? I would like to show my interest in https://github.com/seanmonstar/reqwest/issues/39

The relevant issue seems to be https://github.com/seanmonstar/reqwest/pull/1753

RFC: Add large language models to Rust

https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3603

Man, SO and family has really gone downhill. That top answer is absolutely terrible. In fact, if you care, you can literally look at the RFC discussion here to see the actual debate: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/582

Basically, `for x in y` is kind of redundant, already sorta-kinda supported by itertools, and there's also a ton of macros that sorta-kinda do it already. It would just be language bloat at this point.

Literally has nothing to do with memory management.

Congrats!

> Similarly, uv does not yet generate a platform-agnostic lockfile. This matches pip-tools, but differs from Poetry and PDM, making uv a better fit for projects built around the pip and pip-tools workflows.

Do you expect to make the higher level workflow independent of requirements.txt / support a platform-agnostic lockfile? Being attached to Rye makes me think "no".

Without being platform agnostic, to me this is dead-on-arrival and unable to meet the "Cargo for Python" aim.

> uv supports alternate resolution strategies. By default, uv follows the standard Python dependency resolution strategy of preferring the latest compatible version of each package. But by passing --resolution=lowest, library authors can test their packages against the lowest-compatible version of their dependencies. (This is similar to Go's Minimal version selection.)

> uv allows for resolutions against arbitrary target Python versions. While pip and pip-tools always resolve against the currently-installed Python version (generating, e.g., a Python 3.12-compatible resolution when running under Python 3.12), uv accepts a --python-version parameter, enabling you to generate, e.g., Python 3.7-compatible resolutions even when running under newer versions.

This is great to see though!

I can understand it being a flag on these lower level, directly invoked dependency resolution operations.

While you aren't onto the higher level operations yet, I think it'd be useful to see if there is any cross-ecosystem learning we can do for my MSRV RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3537

How are you handling pre-releases in you resolution? Unsure how much of that is specified in PEPs. Its something that Cargo is weak in today but we're slowly improving.

In the early days of Rust there was a debate about whether to support "green threads" and in doing that require runtime support. It was actually implemented and included for a time but it creates problems when trying to do library or embedded code. At the time Go for example chose to go that route, and it was both nice (goroutines are nice to write and well supported) and expensive (effectively requires GC etc). I don't remember the details but there is a Rust RFC from when they removed green threads:

https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/0806be4f282144cfcd55b...

I did some more digging. By RFC 899, I believe Alex Crichton meant PR 899 in this repo:

https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/899

Still, no real discussion of why unbuffered stderr.

Rust has had a stable SIMD vector API[1] for a long time. But, it's architecture specific. The portable API[2] isn't stable yet, but you probably can't use the portable API for some of the more exotic uses of SIMD anyway. Indeed, that's true in .NET's case too[3].

Rust does all this SIMD too. It just isn't in the standard library. But the regex crate does it. Indeed, this is where .NET got its SIMD approach for multiple substring search from in the first place[4]. ;-)

You're right that Rust's standard library is conservatively vectorized though[5]. The main thing blocking this isn't the lack of SIMD availability. It's more about how the standard library is internally structured, and the fact that things like substring search are not actually defined in `std` directly, but rather, in `core`. There are plans to fix this[6].

[1]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/arch/index.html

[2]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/simd/index.html

[3]: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/72fae0073b35a404f03c3...

[4]: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/88394#issuecomment-16...

[5]: https://github.com/BurntSushi/memchr#why-is-the-standard-lib...

[6]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3469