Rust libz blitz!

@brson I’m happy to pick up same-file, since we’ve already been over it a bit in the walkdir evaluation

Awesome. It’s yours! You can just run it in the same way as the previous one.

This week I am at a Mozilla all-hands and won’t have much time to devote directly to this, but next I’ll make sure we get some more evaluations underway.

Thanks for the feedback @briansmith. I’ll try to incorporate it into the rand evaluation, and to solicit more of your advice when it gets underway.

I’ve started a topic for same-file.

I thought it was still worth time-boxing the evaluation component even though there isn’t a libs meeting. I gave it 2 weeks from today, but am happy to change or remove that.


As we are quite low on actionable example ideas in cookbook. I was thinking about adding some:

But some crates have pretty awesome tutorials/cookbooks by them selves like csv does. What would be the approach for such crates?

Looks like I haven’t got permission to make the same-file OP a wiki. No wrench icon produced by expanding the ... for me :disappointed:

I don’t pretend to know the inner workings of Discourse, but I used my powers to make it a wiki. :slight_smile:


I think we can steal them, with the authors’ permissions!

1 Like

Thanks @KodrAus!

@budziq, yes please, begin creating more recipe ideas.

Argh, it looks like I missed the status update last week again, and I’m not going to get it done today. Sorry for falling behind, but I will catch up next week. Thank you so much @KodrAus, @budziq, and @burntsushi for keeping things moving :heart:

Next week I will endeavor to catch up on reviews, open the rand evaluation, resolve a number of guidelines issues, and close out some of the early evaluations with version bumps and releases.

It came to my attention recently that CC0 would be more a more appropriate license for the cookbook, so I filed an issue against it:

I’ve prepared a PR but IANAL so I would appreciate someone looking into it prior to merging :slight_smile:

Howdy Brian, I’ve at last convinced my RNG-expert friend to start concretely listing his discontents with the current rand lib and coding up some prototypes of alternatives. Feel free to keep the rand review scheduled for 7/25, hopefully we’ll have something more to chew on by this week.


@burntsushi would you stand some larceny :wink:? The examples in csv cookbook are excellent :heart: and would nicely complement the rust-cookbook.

Oh yes of course! I liked @brson’s comment. :slight_smile: I think having the examples in both places is probably quite valuable!

Thanks! I’ll try to revitalize rust-cookbook in upcoming days. Sorry I didn’t catch the like.

@budziq Yeah, I’ll follow up on this. We’re going to need to put some effort into it to get people to relicense.

@bstrie I’ve spoken with @bhickey a bit and encouraged them to participate in the upcoming showdown.

I’ve signed myself up to lead the rand evaluation and will open it … Friday I think.

I also added toml to the desired out-of-band evaluations after an unsatisfying experience trying to lead somebody through the docs over the weekend. I intend to solicit more help leading these evaluations to the twir call for participation, but am still agonizing over the difficulty of motivating crate leads (thanks so much @KodrAus :heart:). I think it’s a pretty intimidating process but it’s actually really simple to e.g. go over the toml crate and make a list of documentation remediations.

I’m triaging now to create a status report.

Edit: I made a desperate plea to twir.

1 Like

One of the last blockers on lazy_static is to add CI badges. During the last few reviews though we’ve not been too keen about the imprecision of these badges though, and @dtolnay and I even plan to remove the recommendation from the guidelines. I’m inclined to close this issue. Any opinions?

1 Like

I’ll put together a quick post on reddit on my experience with libz blitz (which has been very positive) to try encourage people to get involved, because it does look official and daunting.

IMO, running an evaluation doesn’t mean having to know everything, and the libs team / crate authors aren’t antagonistic actors. Everyone is helpful and wants the process to succeed. I do think there’s a degree of mentoring the libs team would need to commit to when someone first picks up an evaluation, but I’ve already found that to be the case.

Status update 2017/07/05

This is another belated status update, covering the time period since 6/23.

The libs team reviewed the error-chain crate at last week’s libs meeting. Unfortunately, due to logistical problems around the Mozilla all-hands, the meeting was not recorded. The meeting notes are on this etherpad though. @aturon or @brson will follow up soon on the thread and file all the bugs.

Some of the big resolutions were:

  • lower the Error trait into probably the alloc crate so no_std error-chain makes sense
  • investigate a complete syntactic redesign to accommodate all the missing capabilities raised in the review. This will certainly require using some form of procedural macros. It may or may not be a 1.0 blocker

Thanks @Yamakaky and @bascule for attending, and thanks to all those who participated in the review.

@KodrAus opened an evalution for same-file, a small support crate that was extracted out of walkdir.

@burntsushi opened an evaluation for gcc. This is the first build-time crate we’ve taken a close look at, so the hope is it has some unique properties. This crate is scheduled for next week, 7/11! Time flies… please go give that thread a look and make any reviews you have soon. I’ll chip in myself before next week.

Very soon we will expect @brson to open the rand evaluation, which is scheduled for 7/25. I’m a bit worried about the time crunch…

@budziq is looking for cookbook ideas for regex, ring, csv, glob, and also same-file. @budziq I will try to help you solidify these into contributor tasks soon but feel free to start making issues of the ones you feel confident about and posting to the twir call for participation.

We are super close to completely closing out the evaluations for bitflags, byteorder, flate2, and lazy_static, and releasing bumped versions.

reqwest is only blocked on associated constants and some decisions about the decomposition of the basic HTTP types. memmap is only blocked on one API refactoring PR that is pending and some followup docs. log has a couple technical changes to make still, particularly structured logging.

We’ve now closed 113 issues against crates in the libz blitz.




API guidelines




I’ve added env_logger to the out of band evaluations.

Please find it’s evaluation thread here.

1 Like