Either way “Rust is helping” is true. And given that Go is a managed language it never really factored into the shared library debate to begin with, whereas Rust forces the issue.
Maybe, but it's misleading. Using the assertion that "$FOO made $BAR popular" when $FOO contributed 1% of that effort and $BAZ contributed the other 99% is enough to make most people consider the original statement inaccurate.
> And given that Go is a managed language it never really factored into the shared library debate to begin with, whereas Rust forces the issue.
How so? Rust allows both shared and static compilation, so it's actually the opposite - Rust specifically doesn't force the use of single-binaries.
I'm struggling to interpret what it is you are saying: Go specifically forces the use of static linkage, whereas in Rust it's optional, is it not?
I am under the belief that in Rust you can opt-out of static linkage, while I know that in Go you cannot.
Are you saying that Rust doesn't allow opt-out of static linkage?
> Using the assertion that "$FOO made $BAR popular"
Thankfully that’s not what I said! This sub-thread is very silly.
FWIW Rust is exceptionally bad at dynamic/shared libraries. There’s a kajillion Rust CLI tools and approximately all of them are single file executables. It’s great.
I have lots of experience with Rust, the Rust community, and a smorgasbords of “rewrite it in Rust” tools. I personally have zero experience with Go, it’s community, and afaik Go tools. I’m sure I’ve used something written in Go without realizing it. YMMV.
