Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SkiFire13 53 days ago
> That's am upper bound, as using a nightly compiler doesn't mean that a nightly compiler was needed.

To be fair it's not even a lower bound, as using a stable compiler doesn't imply the absence of nightly only feature (as in Cargo features, the ones you can enable on crates you depend on).
1 comments
kibwen 53 days ago
For the purposes of this discussion the question is not whether or not a crate exposes optional features that require a nightly compiler, but whether or not a crate makes use of the nightly compiler mandatory, which has become extremely rare in my experience. Perhaps it's more common in some embedded use cases, but if people want to make that assertion, I would ask that they either mention which libraries they're specifically talking about or which nightly features they're specifically referring to.
link
estebank 53 days ago
I think the divide is apps vs libraries: a library that requires their dependants to set an environment variable opting out of stability guarantees is unlikely to gain adoption, but applications that do so are more common, like Firefox.
link
SkiFire13 53 days ago
> For the purposes of this discussion the question is not whether or not a crate exposes optional features that require a nightly compiler, but whether or not a crate makes use of the nightly compiler mandatory

In my opinion what matters is the functionality. If it's provided by a nightly-only crate or as a nightly-only feature of an otherwise non-nightly-only crate it doesn't really matter.

But I agree that this is become more and more rare.

link