Jake Goulding

> and I close the tab (ctrl+f4) then I lose everything. This is not the default behavior: https://github.com/integer32llc/rust-playground/blob/163af6dab05b503a8cd1e7ea994b216d665bb48c/ui/frontend/local_storage.ts#L1-L3 https://github.com/integer32llc/rust-playground/blob/163af6dab05b503a8cd1e7ea994b216d665bb48c/ui/frontend/session_storage.ts#L1-L3 Perhaps you have configured your browser to automatically discard data, in...

> 100th crate in the list may drop to 101 Even easier, a crate can simply release a new backwards-incompatible version. Since we always use the more-or-less-latest version, this is...

> code is still available Which is part of the reason that I avoid adding the shortlink button and prefer the Gist button — I'm betting that GitHub and Gists...

Looks like the last 90 days right now would be ``` id | name | downloads ------+-------------------------+----------- 463 | serde | 1387484 795 | libc | 880648 793 | bitflags...

@sollyucko I'm not weighing in on if that would be better or worse, but it's not as straight-forward as stated due to changing dependencies over time. For example, if crate...

How would `cargo check` be better than `cargo build`? For example, I recently learned: > note that `cargo check` won't invoke LLVM so e.g. `cargo check` won't catch errors like...

Yes, the build menu option is misnamed, as you've already reported #333, but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking why `cargo check` would be better than `cargo build` for...

I think this is mostly a non-starter until https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/3501 is resolved; otherwise we have to build the code twice, doubling the storage requirements.

I just wanted to swing by to let you know that I've seen this PR, but I'm not sure when I'll have time to give it the review focus it...

> An advantage for such response is that we might be able to remove almost all regex (not only the "import" one) Yep, that's what I meant by > but...