GNU bug report logs - #59214
[PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: "M. Ian Graham" <hello+emacs <at> miangraham.com>
To: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 59214 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, pankaj <at> codeisgreat.org
Subject: bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 08:11:54 +0000

João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> Pankaj, is it really that uncommon to have a tool installed as part of
> a Rust package be in the execution path of a shell? It's not uncommon
> in other toolchains with what I think are similar package architectures,
> such as Node JS.

Hello from the peanut gallery and no this is not at all uncommon.

At minimum, guix/nix users avoid rustup (as they do other convenience installers like nvm, gvm, etc) to keep project-specific toolchain versions out of the global environment.

Quantitatively, more mac+homebrew users installed rust-analyzer directly this month than installed rustup. Those users have rust-analyzer in PATH and (probably) no rustup.
https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/rust-analyzer
https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/rustup-init

Personally, my main language is rust and I haven't used rustup in years. It is useful but strictly optional. Requiring it for access to rust-analyzer will break working setups.

If we're adding a new dependency on an optional installation method, can we also please retain the "add rust-analyzer to PATH and eglot will just work" current behavior as well?

Thanks,
Ian

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.