tui-rs VS rust

The TUI is built with the awesome Ratatui [0] library (formerly tui-rs [1]). UX is certainly not my area of expertise and I would not have been able to create Trippy without this library.

[0] https://github.com/ratatui-org/ratatui

[1] https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs

Rust has great libraries for TUIs. tui-rs (https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs) has been used in numerous popular applications, but is unmaintained. ratatui (https://github.com/tui-rs-revival/ratatui) is the maintained version, and is pretty new. Less widely known is cursive (https://github.com/gyscos/cursive), which I have yet to try.

Aside from the libraries, I just wanted to start a project that would make be better at Rust. The easy distribution with cargo is a huge bonus though.

CLI, use Clap. If you want to get fancy, use Tui.

u/lordnacho666 It uses the fabulous https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs (now revived as https://github.com/tui-rs-revival/ratatui) TUI lib.

This app is based on the these two crate in rust (tui-rs , tui-textarea). The text area provide the Emacs motions and I integrated the vim motions there, but the editor in this app as much simpler than the huge VIM and Emacs systems

If you interested in the TUI apps in rust you can start with the crate tui-rs or its revival ratatui. They have examples inside of them which you can start and see the source code to get the basic functionalities. For the text editor you can check examples in the crate tui-textarea.

For Golang there is Bubbletea [1], Textual [2] for Python and tui-rs for Rust [3].

[1] https://github.com/charmbracelet/bubbletea

[2] https://github.com/textualize/textual

[3] https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs

You can check tui-rs, is a library to build CLI interfaces and has some examples about using user input without blocking the UI

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.