Open
Description
New Proposal
Thinking more about this, why have an annoying extra step to init in the first place? The user experience would be smoother, if it would just start!
There would be 3 cases to handle:
- already in directory, just go. Like:
cargo run
- directory exists as sub-directory, cd there internally and go. Like:
cargo -C rustlings run
- directory not found near here, init it transparently, cd there internally and go. Like:
cargo new rustlings; cargo -C rustlings run
Original Proposal
Cargo has two near identical commands new
and init
. They both do exactly the same thing. (But apparently implemented twice, because the message differs a bit.) Additionally only init
has a 2nd behaviour, when not given an argument.
Confusingly rustlings init
is different to that! Since backwards compatibility is hardly important, I suggest to align with cargo
like this:
rustlings init
(re-)initialises the current directory (to avoid pain for people already used to old behaviour, maybe only if it is empty or containsCargo.toml
)rustlings new
creates the directoryrustlings
rustlings init <NAME>
andrustlings new <NAME>
create a new directory<NAME>
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels