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, 8:59:20 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

82 sources
LoganDark·Oct 13, 2026
I know the borrow checker uses rules, but I don't know enough about the internal implementation details to use fully precise terminology. I don't mean borrow checking is just a chain of if-statements or something. I meant check in the abstract. From the GitHub thread: "I think unification just generally doesn't check lifetime bounds of the type." [0] There are steps, or rules or whatever, that perform soundness (or well-formedness or whatever) checks. And clearly one was missing. My guess was just that maybe someone didn't think it was necessary for soundness. [0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/164250#issuecomment...
In 11 year old unsoundness bugs found in Rust borrow checker
akoboldfrying·Oct 13, 2026
From TFA: > How on earth was this not found before this??? https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/164250#issuecomment... > Assigning P-high https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/164250#issuecomment... In general I agree with fg137's assessment of soundness bugs as being inherently high-impact, i.e., serious: > The Rust community is well aware that such bugs exist, will be found, and address them just like other high impact bugs.
In 11 year old unsoundness bugs found in Rust borrow checker
chubot·Oct 12, 2026
Even in software, there are many things that haven't changed. e.g. Why do Rust and CPython still have over 5,000 open issues each? At some point, will the superintelligence fix all the bugs autonomously? When is that going to happen? https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues https://github.com/python/cpython/issues What about new features? In every thread about Rust, people are clamoring for new features and libraries. People wonder why there can't be a batteries-included standard library like Go. So now that LLMs are so smart, is that a solved problem? Or are we still bottlenecked on the expertise of a few experts? --- Also, what happened to AI's passing the Turing test? I see tons of slop articles that are obvious to most HN readers. They haven't fooled us apparently -- the longer the interaction, the more obvious it becomes wheth
Read the rest
er it's AI. (That said, I use AI all the time and find it to be a great tool. IMO is is a tool, not an autonomous intelligence with a will of its own.)
In The gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is widening
aw1621107·Oct 7, 2026
For what it's worth, according to the PR that added the annotation [0] doing so generally resulted in decreases in compile times and binary sizes on benchmarks. Furthermore, an additional experiment that avoided emitting the inline attribute on structs with >5 fields resulted in benchmark regressions compared to always emitting the attribute [1]. I'd guess this is one of those things which may help in aggregate but hurts for specific cases. That being said, one of the Rust devs indicated in the corresponding lobste.rs discussion [2] that they're open to revisiting/rebalancing things if they get enough bug reports indicating something is up, so it might not hurt to tag onto the bug report the author will (hopefully) eventually submit. [0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117727 [1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118031 [2]:
Read the rest
https://lobste.rs/s/dldhpw/rust_s_derive_often_implies_inlin...
In Rust's derive often implies inline
edelbitter·Oct 2, 2026
> who's out here using git hashes as a security tool Among others, dependency management in Rust [1] and Python [2] sometimes uses references that work similar to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/ec999ed [3] to suggest one particular version of the project, authored by the specified maintainer. Unfortunately, it means neither, unless you pushed it. The hash points to whatever the first person uploading it to github submitted. And the author/org name in the URL is window dressing: all the objects go in one big bucket regardless of push permission to one particular fork (because why wouldn't they - today, collisions are believed to be recognizable because the cheapest way to craft them results in clear tells). [1]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/specifying-depende... [2]: https://pip.pypa.io/en/stable/topics/vcs-support/#
Read the rest
git [3]: N.B. the "This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository." warning Github has started to add to URLs like that.
In Git 3.0's upcoming SHA-256 default will be a costly mistake

Showing the 15 most recent of 82 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.