![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
TMI: rustpkg marches on
Apr. 15th, 2013 06:21 pmI landed this commit from the end of last week, cleaning up tests and error handling in rustpkg, and I submitted this pull request that allows rustpkg to build executables.
When talking to Graydon about how to do regression tests for rustpkg, I realized I'd been doin' it wrong, at least a bit -- the new policy for rustpkg is that you're going to have to name your crate files main.rs if you want to get an executable and lib.rs if you want to get a library (both can coexist), with additional options for building tests and benchmarks. I'd been allowing an additional option, which is naming your main crate foo.rs for a package named foo, and inferring whether or not it was a library based on the presence or absence of a main function. This was all wrong, so I'll have to undo that work tomorrow. I'm trying to tell myself I'm "exhibiting flexibility and willingness to admit mistakes" rather than "spending all my time writing code that I then delete".
For an easy end-of-the-day task, I decided I'd try to kill off a few bad copies, but that involved rebasing a branch, which involved rebuilding LLVM, which is evidently going to involve deleting my build/ directory and starting from scratch. Which, amusingly, emphasizes the need for a functional rustpkg!
When talking to Graydon about how to do regression tests for rustpkg, I realized I'd been doin' it wrong, at least a bit -- the new policy for rustpkg is that you're going to have to name your crate files main.rs if you want to get an executable and lib.rs if you want to get a library (both can coexist), with additional options for building tests and benchmarks. I'd been allowing an additional option, which is naming your main crate foo.rs for a package named foo, and inferring whether or not it was a library based on the presence or absence of a main function. This was all wrong, so I'll have to undo that work tomorrow. I'm trying to tell myself I'm "exhibiting flexibility and willingness to admit mistakes" rather than "spending all my time writing code that I then delete".
For an easy end-of-the-day task, I decided I'd try to kill off a few bad copies, but that involved rebasing a branch, which involved rebuilding LLVM, which is evidently going to involve deleting my build/ directory and starting from scratch. Which, amusingly, emphasizes the need for a functional rustpkg!