On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 06:07:52PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:18 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 04:52:36PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 4:24 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 04:13:06PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 12:05 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I went with bats because it looked the fastest to write tests in - > > > it's shell after all. > > > > > > > Really? I wouldn't write anything of consequence in shell if Python was > > an option. > > > > How about Rust? I've gotten over how spartan the Rust test framework is > > so I wouldn't have a problem writing it in that either. > > > > I have a very strong preference for Python. I am quite bad at Rust. > Whatever is in bindings/rust/ is Viresh' jurisdiction and I defer to > him but I would prefer to be able to keep track of what's happening in > tools/ and work on it myself without too much frustration. And writing > anything in rust has been pure frustration so far. > Fair enough, Python it is then. I personally had no problem picking up Rust - seems Rust and I have a similar view - I've always had issues with the vagueness of ownership and lifetimes in other languages, particularly C/C++. Rust gets it. And if you do make a hash of something clippy provides good suggestions, or at least clearly identifies the problem. That helped me a lot with the learning curve. Cheers, Kent.