wasm-pack VS rfcs

For a much simpler but less flexible approach there's wasm-pack for creating JS packages from Rust, and wasm-bindgen for easy interop. Both have very good documentation.

After four years, I found some time to pay that deb-tech (yes, quite a long time, eh). To make it fun I rewrote everything from scratch in SolidJS, which went smooth thanks to this amazing library p5js-wrapper. For WASM, C++ is still a good choice, but what about Rust? I did some research and found wasm-pack. A few lines in the cargo.toml file and we were ready to generate compiled + ready to import bytecode!

Support using wasm-pack in Worklets (particularly AudioWorklet) #689

If you're looking to use it to interface with node/browsers, then try wasm-pack.

Webassembly: wasm-bindgen 0.2.83 / wasm-pack 0.10.3

wasm-pack has bugs - it publishes a module which declares itself as a commonjs module. (You can fix that by manually adding "type": "module" in package.json). Then the web build should work with other bundlers. I opened an issue about this over a year ago. There's a PR and everything, but no movement :/

wasm-pack helps you build Rust-generated WebAssembly packages and use it in the browser or with Node.js.

Is the Rust WASM ecosystem being half dead better? wasm-pack and wasm-bindgen are barely maintained anymore, and trust me it's not because everything works flawlessly…

I've been learning Rust for the past few weeks and have been enjoying it a lot.

- The community is very helpful on Discord (https://discord.com/invite/rust-lang-community).

- The package ecosystem (crates.io) makes it very easy to find and import things, and they're consistently documented.

- There's a path to compiling on web via WebAssembly (https://rustwasm.github.io/wasm-pack/)

In a few weeks of learning the language, I managed to put together this visualization: https://twitter.com/admiralakk/status/1542560489091350529

But realistically, either Go or Rust will be fine. You should pick the one you're more likely to stick with and learn, even when it gets tough. I've found the community aspect to be very helpful, because then at least I know I'm not the only idiot out there.

There are various ways to set up a web project that uses Svelte, Wasm, and Rust. For example, wasm-pack from the rust-wasm group provides a template for simple HTML-CSS-JS applications. There are also several project templates for React or Svelte with Rust and Wasm.

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