Comment by Capricorn2481
9 months ago
> This implies the writer didn't assume what happens if you "turn-off" orphan rules
It implies that the writer would prefer using a different language, not that Rust would be better if it was all the same but with the parts he doesn't like taken out
> It implies that the writer would prefer using a different language
That's not what they wrote.
> There are mostly valid reasons for wanting the orphan rule for things such as libraries uploaded to crates.io, and I am willing to concede that crates published there should obey this.
> But I have a very hard time caring about this rule for applications and libraries developed in end products. I'm explicitly not saying binary crates, because most bigger projects will be composed of more than one crate, and many will be more than one workspace.
It talks explicitly about Rust. In hindsight, the author might have been better suited by another language, but expecting Rust to suddenly become another language is weird.