ureq VS rust

I also enjoyed using ureq as an http client.

After a quick check of the available rust http client libraries I opted for reqwest. It has a pretty simple API and it seems to be among the most used libraries for this matters. But I'm a bit concerned about all its dependencies so I might try ureq later.

Async is only useful when you have hundreds of connections open at the same time and idling most of the time; otherwise it's a liability. If your web API does not allow that (e.g. it has rate-limiting, which most APIs do), I suggest going with a client that performs blocking I/O and spawning threads if you need parallelism. https://github.com/algesten/ureq should fit the bill.

I think you'll find a lot of people claiming its overkill, but it will have excellent documentation for both sides, offer reasonable speed, and let you hash out the actual logic of your system without worrying too much about if your low-level implementation is correct. Two good frameworks for the server would be Actix or Rocket. For the client, i'd reccomend either using reqwest or ureq. From there, you can just set up a few POST endpoints, and get to going.

If you want an HTTP client with few dependencies and little unsafe code, take a look at https://github.com/algesten/ureq

Give ureq a try: https://github.com/algesten/ureq

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.