HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
Thinkofname
steven
Rust2017–2017
Thinkofname / steven

steven

Rust Minecraft Client

2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
273GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Rust Minecraft Client

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:03:16 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by week2 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-03-28 20:17:16 UTC to 2017-06-02 02:59:37 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.

012017-03-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-04-03 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMar 272017-04-03 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-04-10 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-04-10 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-04-17 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-04-17 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-04-24 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-04-24 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsApr 242017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-05-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-05-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-05-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-05-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-05-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-05-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-05-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-05-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-06-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMay 29

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
Mar 272017-03-27 00:00:00 UTC2017-04-03 00:00:00 UTC101
Apr 32017-04-03 00:00:00 UTC2017-04-10 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 102017-04-10 00:00:00 UTC2017-04-17 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 172017-04-17 00:00:00 UTC2017-04-24 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 242017-04-24 00:00:00 UTC2017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 12017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-05-08 00:00:00 UTC000
May 82017-05-08 00:00:00 UTC2017-05-15 00:00:00 UTC000
May 152017-05-15 00:00:00 UTC2017-05-22 00:00:00 UTC000
May 222017-05-22 00:00:00 UTC2017-05-29 00:00:00 UTC000
May 292017-05-29 00:00:00 UTC2017-06-05 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

2 sources
> It seems there is this effort to get C/C++ code performing fast inside of a browser... then at the same time there seems to be an effort to get people to stop coding in C/C++ altogether and switch to something more memory safe. WebAssembly offers a compelling "alternative": instead of (or in addition to, if you desire) writing in memory-safe languages, with all the cost that incurs, you can write in unsafe languages and the consequence of memory errors is limited by the sandbox. This approaches the problem from a different direction, on one side we have e.g. Go and Rust. Go with garbage collection and its overhead, or Rust with zero-(runtime)-cost abstractions which push the burden onto the programmer at development time. C compiled to WebAssembly is low-overhead but safer than native code, giving the benefits of both worlds. I would ha
Read the rest
ve never expected it, but now believe C is the language of the future for the web. Built on decades of history with an unbeatably large existing codebase, extensive analysis and tooling support, standardization, raw power without the shackles of safety, yet confined to limit damage by the browser sandbox. True cross-platform compatibility with powerful HTML5 web APIs. My experience about a month so far developing a C application compiled to WebAssembly/asm.js using emscripten has been surprisingly smooth. I can compile and test natively, including enabling the clang static analyzer or -fsanitize=address and -fsanitize=undefined to find bugs endemic to C, fix them and then deploy and run on the web. For the most part I can code directly to OpenGL and GLFW, which emscripten bridges to WebGL and other browser APIs seamlessly. I had to contribute a handful of fixes to emscripten, as well as an implementation of glfwJoystick to the HTML5 Gamepad API (also working on file drop and monitor API), but this was straightforward and easier than expected, emscripten happily accepted the patches. There are Rust (https://github.com/thinkofname/steven) and Go (https://github.com/thinkofname/steven-go) applications in this problem space but porting a similar application written in plain C (https://github.com/fogleman/Craft) to emscripten was nearly trivial (if there is any interest: https://github.com/satoshinm/NetCraft). After about a week I was able to consider the web-based port finished, and then focus on developing new features, for both web and native. Is C compiled to WebAssembly a panacea? Not by a long shot, there are many (perhaps most) scenarios where memory-safe languages such as Rust would be preferred. But for games and other programs where performance is more critical over correctness and safety, WASM is a godsend.
In WebAssembly: Mozilla Won

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.