I think the most popular web framework is rocket.rs, it needs nightly. That's latest example I have, honestly when I looked a year ago others libraries were using nightly.
Why would you tell people that the recent libraries require nightly, when you admit that you haven't even looked at the library ecosystem in the past year? I honestly don't get the motivation that would make you want to come here just to post lies about a programming language.
I use rust a lot, and it’s been heavily geared towards nightly for a long time.
The whole rust nightly/beta/stable hasnt worked well, because (afaik) the beta usage is tiny and people tend to jump on nightly or stable. It’s only very recently any effort has been made to change this for the new edition.
...so, you know, the comment may not be entirely accurate, sure, but it’s our fault people have come away from rust feeling that way.
The OP is not at fault here, and definitely not, I think, willfully lying.
Take a deep breath; there’s no need for this sort of attitude, and frankly it reflects badly on the rest of us (rust users).
Rust wouldn't be a better language if nightly were instantly made stable. Instead, we'd have a ton of half-baked features that we'd be supporting for eternity.
Rocket requiring nightly is unfortunate, and I wish it didn't, but aside from Rocket stable has been a good forcing function to get crate authors to not add nightly dependencies.
Anyway, from what I see, actix seems to get more buzz than Rocket these days, precisely because the former works on stable.
You're getting pretty far away from the original claim though. Which widely used crates require nightly to take advantage of nll?
Some crates will always require nightly because there will always be some people that want to take advantage of the latest features. That's a good thing to a degree, because it encourages experimentation with said features before stabilizing them. This is completely different from implying that nightly Rust is required by a lot of popular crates, which just isn't true. Most people are productively using stable Rust.
> The whole rust nightly/beta/stable hasnt worked well, because (afaik) the beta usage is tiny and people tend to jump on nightly or stable. It’s only very recently any effort has been made to change this for the new edition.
My impression was that most people feel the Beta toolchain is doing its job just fine, because most projects that use CI include a Beta test run. I don't think the plan was ever to have people using Beta on the command line as their daily driver.
Can you give an example of soundness regressions in the previous release? Neither the 1.29.1 release nor 1.29.2 are indicative of people not using the beta; the former concerned a potential security vulnerability in a stdlib API that had existed for several releases, and the latter concerned a runtime heisenbug that could neither be found by merely compiling with beta nor even reliably by running the code.
> Notice specially the last month or so of actively asking people to try the beta.
This is because for the last month the beta has represented the first release candidate for Rust 2018, which is more important than normal releases in all three of implementation scope, backwards compatibility concerns, and marketing potential.
