I think you can probably make the question a lot more interesting by asking them to implement max without using any branching syntax. I’m not saying that is necessarily a good interview question, but it is certainly more interesting. That might also be where some of the more esoteric answers are coming from.

I actually vastly prefer this behavior. It allows me to jump to (readable) source in library code easily in my editor, as well as experiment with different package versions without having to redownload, and (sort of) work offline too. I guess, I don’t really know what it would do otherwise. I think Rust requires you to have the complete library source code for everything you’re using regardless.

I suppose it could act like NPM, and keep a separate copy of every library for every single project on my system, but that’s even less efficient. Yes, I think NPM only downloads the “built” files (if the package uses a build system & is properly configured), but it’s still just minified JS source code most of the time.

I agree with basically everything said in the article.

It’s also a bad article.

It’s twice as long as it could be while only saying half as much as it should. An unfalsifiable thesis with an amorphous CTA, and a self-righteous, self-fulfilling conclusion.

How about we get some thinkers on this issue instead of loquacious parrots who love the sound of their own virtue-signaling.

Well, actually I would tend to agree that &[T] is preferable to AsRef in most cases; all of the smart pointers you mentioned can also easily be turned into plain references. I probably could have chosen a better example.

I’ve used Nord, Sapphire, and Catppuccin over the years, and I would recommend trying all of them.