I think I’m going to start learning Rust. Can anyone suggest a good IDE to use?
rust-analyzeris a pretty good LSP, and works in most modern text editors.My advice? Just pick an editor and stick to it.
VSCode? Sure.
Jetbrains? Good choice.
Hell, Emacs? Why not?
I personally use Neovim, and it just works. No matter what I’m programming in, I’m still at home.
Just pick an editor that works for you. I’d suggest VSCode. Use VSCodium for a true FOSS experience, or Helix for a beginner friendly terminal editor.
If you really just want something Rust-focused, there’s RustRover from Jetbrains, but that’s about it.
deleted by creator
…which is proprietary.
As are all their products.
And it will be freaking awesome.
I mean, I mostly wanted to point that out because OP prefers FOSS, but I did think at least their IntelliJ Community Edition was open-source.
But I just checked their website and it says “Free, built on open source”, arguably the worst option, although I guess, it’s what the MIT folks want.I just hate how people overwhelmingly recommend proprietary editors. It’s the one thing you’d think the FOSS community should be exceedingly good at.
If you’re actually developing FOSS with it, you can use their products for free.
JetBrains has a lot of good will in the community, and for good reason.
Would it be nicer if their IDEs were FOSS? Probably. Would it hurt their profits? Most likely.
Yeah, I mention that later in the comment. Of course, there’s the whole suite of Jetbrains editors.
helix
There’s not going to be a rust-specific FOSS editor AFAIK (nothing like RustRover from JetBrains). However the Rust extensions are first-class experience on VS Codium, Neovim, Emacs, etc.
More importantly, unlike Java, C#, Kotlin, C++, or Python Rust doesn’t benefit all that much from a language-specific IDE. There’s no bulky management of a virtual environment, no make files, no maven, etc. Just a human-readable cargo.toml for your packages, an install command, and a build+run command.
There’s no bulky management of a virtual environment, no make files, no maven, etc. Just a human-readable cargo.toml for your packages
In your perspective, what’s the difference between a cargo.toml and a requirements.txt, packages.json, pom.xml, etc? Is there any?
Vanilla
cargo.tomlfiles are more akin to arequirements.txtthan any of the others, which allow you to do things like set variables or create run scripts. However, vanillacargo.tomlfiles have some minimal Make functionality so it’s a bit more than just project dependencies. Each of those ecosystems has a slightly different approach to handling build tooling and dependency management. Rust puts the basic build and dependencies in one file with the assumption your system has the right Rust version, which is a lot simpler than others.So there is fundamentally no difference between cargo and any other contemporary dependency/package manager.
Also, it’s worth noting that cargo is a fairly good package manager all things considered. It has a native lock file format, unlike requirements.txt. Running code that’s built with cargo typically just works with
cargo build. No futzing around with special build commands for your specific build tooling like in js. I can’t speak for maven since I’ve only used it a little bit and never used it enough to be comfortable with it… but cargo just doesn’t really have many major paper cuts.Admittedly, cargo isn’t really special - it’s just a classic package manager that learned from the hindsight of its predecessors. It’s all minor improvements if any. There’s actually innovative build tooling out there: things like buck2, nix, etc. But those are an entirely different ball game.
Also, it’s worth noting that cargo is a fairly good package manager all things considered.
Yes, I’m familiar with Cargo. My point was to point out the absurdity and silliness of OP’s remarks on “no bulky management of a virtual environment, no make files, no maven, etc.” Once Rust fundamentalista take off their rose-tinted glasses, it’s clear that Cargo is just as good (or as bad) as any contemporary integrated build system.
While part of me agrees, I will say most ecosystems have some glaring flaws in them. Python’s lack of lock files in particular is something that annoys me to no end. Having to use poetry, pipenv, or whatever else people are using now to get around it sucks. Python’s lack of being able to use multiple versions of the same library is also a thing… but not something I’ve found issues with personally.
I’m not going to say cargo is some mind blowing system cause I really don’t think it’s innovative, at all - but I do think it’s far better than most ecosystems just due to benefits of hindsight. Having an opinionated, simple build system that does all the right things out of the box is valuable, and I can’t think of any mainstream language that really hits that mark otherwise.
and I can’t think of any mainstream language that really hits that mark otherwise.
Go
Well, it is standard.
That’s probably the biggest thing to consider: you use Rust, you use Cargo. It’s unanimous.
It’s built right into the language ecosystem, so there’s no divide, and everything’s just easily available to you.
To get to your core point; I agree python without a virtual env, just raw python, is definintely not bulky. I’d argue its much more lightweight than cargo. My comment was because sounds like OP could be new-ish to programming, and, for a number of projects (ex; Android development), going from a big IDE to just a plaintext editor + command line commands can be a really painful jump. I remeber a Java course having a series of IDE tutorials and I could not for the life of me figure out the plaintext+commandline equivlent. The same can happen for certain python projects if a tutorial expects the editor to set the PYTHONPATH and the project has a venv, and the tutorial expects the editor’s terminals start already-inside python virtual environment. That kind of stuff can make 'python without an IDE" confusing and daunting to someone merely following PyCharm tutorials.
I just wanted to assure OP they likely wouldn’t have that kind of experince with Rust. AFAIK Rust tutorials rarely (if ever) assume an IDE.
Being not-bulky isn’t a rust specific thing, a half-decent package manager meets the qualitification, but OP was asking about Rust and might not know.
Vscode works well on Mac, and it has good Rust support.
Just wanted to point that rust-analyzer is the fantastic language server that powers the language support, and it runs in a lot of editors (VS Code, Emacs, Neovim, …)
Not technically IDEs, but you can try Helix or Lapce, both written in rust.
I love Lapce, but it is not what I’d call a Rust IDE. It’s a beta/alpha general text editor with some initial extensions for Rust.
Not really a great place to start learning Rust
I think both of these are just editors written in Rust.
Doom Emacs with
lspandrust-analyzerDefinitely VSCode (or one of the many forks).
I also recommend combining it with Docker, the Remote Development extension, and Dev Containers, to keep your dev environment isolated from the rest of your operating system. That way you’ll be able to easily install things you’re not sure if you want to use, and cleanly rollback/remove them.
It’ll also make life easier when (not if) you need to move your dev setup to another computer. Possibly even a completely different operating system.
Rust dev in emacs using rustic and lsp-mode is quite good.
VIM + plugins
I have to admit that while I’m old enough to remember VIM from days of yore, I never found the love that everyone had/has for it. Is it really as good as modern IDE’s?
Yes. Though neovim has stolen the limelight really. YCM or ALE with vim, ctrl+p plugins, nerdtree, lightline and you basically have an IDE
If you’re going the vim route I’d go with NeoVim. The lua support for plugins has resulted in some really great IDE-like plugins. That being said, I still prefer VScode with vim mode.
There’s actually a cool plugin for VSCode that lets you bridge NeoVim into it if you want the best of both worlds
Ooorr… vscode with vim extensions/keyboard mappings. :)
I tried: things like string subs didn’t work, no visual block mode, macros non-existant
Real Vim for me!
its always an option.
VIM is more than an option. It transcends languages, frameworks, paradigms. Vim will always be there for you
hail VIM!
