HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
rust-lang
rust
Rust2012–2026
rust-lang / rust

rust

Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.

Languages & Compilers
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
818Distinct people
1,825Mentions
8Explicit recommenders
121.9KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

10 years ago, I commented on the Rust issue for "Incremental recompilation", where it was suggested that Rust could at least adopt Haskell GHC's model of incrementality, which…

nh2 used a recommendation phrase. 11 indexed comments match. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

Informational Commenters provide technical explanations for Rust's release cadence and design choices, such as the separation of stabilization processes and syntax tradeoffs. The discussion highlights consistent development practices and detailed reasoning behind language features.

What changed this week. Read the supporting reply

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Informational

Commenters provide technical explanations for Rust's release cadence and design choices, such as the separation of stabilization processes and syntax tradeoffs. The discussion highlights consistent development practices and detailed reasoning behind language features.

Supporting reply 1 · Supporting reply 2 · 4 discussions summarized

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 6:01:08 PM UTC.

Rust 1.100 direct repository linkDebated

The discussion highlights significant new features in Rust 1.100, such as the stabilized never type and unused dependency warnings, while sparking a substantive debate over whether the language's lack of a stable ABI is a necessary trade-off for its generic system or an impediment to library distribution. Participants clash between those viewing the current source-only model as sufficient and those arguing that a native stable ABI is essential for practical binary interoperability.

66 readable replies · Supporting reply 1 · Supporting reply 2 · Supporting reply 3 · Supporting reply 4
Rust 1.100 direct repository linkDebated

The discussion centers on Rust 1.100.0, highlighting major stabilizations like the never type and custom allocators while noting that some APIs were omitted from the initial summary. A significant portion of the thread debates the feasibility and necessity of a stable ABI, with technical explanations contrasting against user desires for precompiled libraries.

47 readable replies · Supporting reply 1 · Supporting reply 2 · Supporting reply 3 · Supporting reply 4
Systemd Loves Rust direct repository link

Read the discussion on HN. A full-thread summary is not available yet.

Showing the three threads with the most distinct people linking this repo, from 51 threads this week.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year1,825 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2012-01-20 23:03:27 UTC to 2026-10-22 06:16:46 UTC.

0501001502012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 42 mentions; 6 submissions, 36 comments20122013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 82 mentions; 6 submissions, 76 comments2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 138 mentions; 6 submissions, 132 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 114 mentions; 9 submissions, 105 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 122 mentions; 5 submissions, 117 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 119 mentions; 12 submissions, 107 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 88 mentions; 1 submissions, 87 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 115 mentions; 11 submissions, 104 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 166 mentions; 20 submissions, 146 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 149 mentions; 12 submissions, 137 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 151 mentions; 25 submissions, 126 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 167 mentions; 12 submissions, 155 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 132 mentions; 11 submissions, 121 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 158 mentions; 8 submissions, 150 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 82 mentions; 14 submissions, 68 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20122012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC42636
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC82676
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1386132
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1149105
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1225117
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC11912107
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC88187
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC11511104
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC16620146
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC14912137
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC15125126
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC16712155
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC13211121
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1588150
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC821468

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction
Website | Getting started | Learn | Documentation | Contributing This is the main source code repository for Rust. It contains the compiler, standard library, and documentation. Why Rust? Performance: Fast and memory-efficient, suitable for critical services, embedded devices, and easily integrated with other languages. Reliability: Our rich type system and ownership model ensure memory and thread safety, reducing bugs at compile-time. Productivity: Comprehensive documentation, a compiler committed to providing great diagnostics, and advanced tooling including package manager and build tool (Cargo), auto-formatter (rustfmt), linter (Clippy) and editor support (rust-analyzer). Quick Start Read "Installation" from The Book. Installing from Source If you really want to install from source (though this is not recommended), see INSTALL.md. Getting Help See https://www.rust-lang.org/community for a list of chat platforms and forums. Contributing See CONTRIBUTING.md. For a detailed explanation of the compiler's architecture and how to begin contributing, see the rustc-dev-guide. License Rust is primarily distributed under the terms of both the MIT license and the Apache License (Version 2.0), with portions covered by various BSD-like licenses. See LICENSE-APACHE, LICENSE-MIT, and COPYRIGHT for details. Trademark The Rust Foundation owns and protects the Rust and Cargo trademarks and logos (the "Rust Trademarks"). If you want to use these names or brands, please read the Rust language trademark policy. Third-party logos may be subject to third-party copyrights and trademarks. See Licenses for details.
Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

88 sources
MaulingMonkey·Dec 17, 2018
> Just use IRC ... the problem with writing down all ideas and all discussion like with Git issues or a forum is that the few good ones get buried in all the shit. Buried is still searchable and linkable, IRC generally isn't. Poorly rehashing old discussions generally doesn't help improve the signal to noise ratio either IME. It's not necessarily obvious where all discussion should take place either. I started writing a VisualRust patch to add stdlib natvis files to MSVC projects, which instead morphed into a better rustc patch: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/43221 Thanks to this buried gem I stumbled across in a search: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/36503#issuecomment-... If that was an IRC discussion somewhere instead, it probably wouldn't have gotten done (or at least not nearly so soon), because I'd be chatting
Read the rest
and listening in the wrong channel/silo.
In Organizational Debt
martell·Dec 8, 2018
More generally with OSS I have found that it mostly depends on the level of contribution. There are usually some trivial tasks around docs or simple items that can be done with minimal knowledge of the language or project codebase, additionally there are more low-mid tier tasks that require looking at past commits / structure of the project but follow the same pattern. source: I have contributed to probably close to 100 OSS projects in the last decade varying in size and complexity. Specifically With respect to kubernetes I have spent some time with trivial tasks for related projects like acs-engine because I am using azure for deployments. I have not contributed to TensorFlow but in limited areas I imagine I could help with bindings, cross platform support and maybe optimisations of functions given that this is important because the comp
Read the rest
ute cost involved. I would not however be able to dig into some of the complex models the codebase because I have not studied data-science or in any great detail. We are in an era where OSS project organisers can now see the value and build on these small changes. If you can get enough people interested and contributing towards a goal you can reach a critical mass. The one tip I would have if you were looking to get started out in OSS development is to make some kind of assessment around how easy it would be to work on a project. For example: Rust is very popular right now and has been gaining traction for awhile. This is no accident and building a programming language out in the open is very very difficult. A number of very skilled Engineers have allocated time to mentoring. So if you wanted to just jump in having never contributed before you could just filter an issue by mentor. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Ais... Filtering this further by E-easy to get yourself started. This is probably not the best example as writing a programming language is not an easy feat. The example was chosen however to more highlight what to look for in projects if you want to get your feet wet and start contributing to OSS.
In Do one have to be an exceptional programmer to contribute to opensource projects
v_lisivka·Dec 6, 2018
Yes, I can use numbers to represent anything, but I will lost compiler support. It's not a solution but workaround. I saw number of tickets about that in Rust ticketing system. This one seems to be most relevant: https://github.com/nikomatsakis/rust-memory-model/issues/41 Then these ones: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/36927 https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/c-style-enums-in-ffi-and-a... https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-enum-from-integer/...
In Rust 2018 is here, but what is it?
steveklabnik·Nov 20, 2018
Here's my first PR to Rust: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/4305 Note that it was rejected because I sent it into the wrong branch (we do use master these days) and so I even had to resubmit it https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/4308 I'm about to send in my 972nd PR now. The Rust book is 520 pages; that was the second version, the first of which was ~300 pages. Quite a big difference from +34/-2. I'm at +142,087/-166,524 lines to the main repo now, and #12 overall contributor. Yes, not everyone who sends in a small patch will become a core contributor. But some will. It's a numbers game.
In “The 's' is sad”: 4-year-old submits Linux kernel doc patch (2014)

Showing the 15 most recent of 88 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.