Let me point out that even if you think that this project is "not rust-y enough" by violating basic premises of the Rust way, it would still be useful as it outperforms all those C based project with at least as many guarantees than the C versions.
To me the important part is that we as programmers start advertising our intent. If the intent was to learn how Rust works, then we should write that in the description. Instead we write things like "very fast and lightweight framework". To many people fast and lightweight is good enough. Many other people would also like dependability and sustainability. So please, just put a little label on your github project.
All my open source projects, for example, are exploratory. None of them was meant to be used in production unless you tested rigorously that it would work, and that is on you then. There is nothing wrong with that, I think, as long as you communicate it up front.
People are just importing open source libraries with flashy sounding descriptions left and right, and then they find out those were unfinished and crash all the time, or the author ignores bug reports, or will not maintain it anymore, or thinks it's ok to switch the APIs around on you, breaking your ability to upgrade without reworking your application.
Again, there is nothing wrong with that.
Just be honest about it up front.
To me the important part is that we as programmers start advertising our intent. If the intent was to learn how Rust works, then we should write that in the description. Instead we write things like "very fast and lightweight framework". To many people fast and lightweight is good enough. Many other people would also like dependability and sustainability. So please, just put a little label on your github project.
All my open source projects, for example, are exploratory. None of them was meant to be used in production unless you tested rigorously that it would work, and that is on you then. There is nothing wrong with that, I think, as long as you communicate it up front.
People are just importing open source libraries with flashy sounding descriptions left and right, and then they find out those were unfinished and crash all the time, or the author ignores bug reports, or will not maintain it anymore, or thinks it's ok to switch the APIs around on you, breaking your ability to upgrade without reworking your application.
Again, there is nothing wrong with that. Just be honest about it up front.