Rain Paharia

And if you do that, then you get access to like the full set of algorithms to the extent that your create support that to the extent that your graph supports. That's awesome.

And if you do that, then you get access to like the full set of algorithms to the extent that your create support that to the extent that your graph supports. That's awesome.

So I got one. So this is a crate that... So I maintained this crate, but I didn't write it. I just happened to have been the one that manages its crate cyber releases. So this is a crate called Camino. So this was originally written by Boats, who was a Rust project alumna, So they were the one who drove like async await, for example, in Rust. And so they've done a work.

So I got one. So this is a crate that... So I maintained this crate, but I didn't write it. I just happened to have been the one that manages its crate cyber releases. So this is a crate called Camino. So this was originally written by Boats, who was a Rust project alumna, So they were the one who drove like async await, for example, in Rust. And so they've done a work.

And so one of the things that they did was, if you've done anything around bots in Rust, like file bots and file names and stuff, then it's always been bothersome because in the very, very typical Rust will be like anally correct about everything as far as possible. So that mindset kind of gets reflected in the way the path libraries are designed.

And so one of the things that they did was, if you've done anything around bots in Rust, like file bots and file names and stuff, then it's always been bothersome because in the very, very typical Rust will be like anally correct about everything as far as possible. So that mindset kind of gets reflected in the way the path libraries are designed.

So they will handle weird things like unpaired surrogates on Windows or like non-UTF-8 paths on Unixes. And so that ends up being like, if you want to write a tool that is as correct as possible and handles as many files as possible, then you probably need to take care of all that. But in reality, most of the time you don't, right? Most of the time, like if imagine you're like an oxide, right?

So they will handle weird things like unpaired surrogates on Windows or like non-UTF-8 paths on Unixes. And so that ends up being like, if you want to write a tool that is as correct as possible and handles as many files as possible, then you probably need to take care of all that. But in reality, most of the time you don't, right? Most of the time, like if imagine you're like an oxide, right?

And you're writing a simple, like a simple like server or whatever, like you are going to, like the files you're going to get and the files you're going to use are like They're going to be, like, well-structured, right, in some way? Right, right. So Boats wrote a library called Camino, which... essentially replaces OS string as the base with string as the base for things.

And you're writing a simple, like a simple like server or whatever, like you are going to, like the files you're going to get and the files you're going to use are like They're going to be, like, well-structured, right, in some way? Right, right. So Boats wrote a library called Camino, which... essentially replaces OS string as the base with string as the base for things.

So these are bots that behave like strings. So they don't handle every possible path, but they handle basically every realistic bot that most programs are ever going to see. So this is a crate that I use for pretty much everything that I end up writing, and I think most people should use it. There's a,

So these are bots that behave like strings. So they don't handle every possible path, but they handle basically every realistic bot that most programs are ever going to see. So this is a crate that I use for pretty much everything that I end up writing, and I think most people should use it. There's a,

there are actually some, now this sounds like, you know, there sounds like a trade-off in some cases, right? Like you're, you know, you're losing some functionality or whatever. But one of the things I've realized from my time working on this stuff is that actually that trade-off was always false.

there are actually some, now this sounds like, you know, there sounds like a trade-off in some cases, right? Like you're, you know, you're losing some functionality or whatever. But one of the things I've realized from my time working on this stuff is that actually that trade-off was always false.

And so as an example, like, you know, if you say, if you have a path buff and that path buff has a path that isn't a valid string, then that path does not get serialized as JSON properly. Right. As an example. or if you get a string, it won't get serialized properly. So if you are ever deserializing bots, you are already putting in a restriction that those bots must be valid strings, right?

And so as an example, like, you know, if you say, if you have a path buff and that path buff has a path that isn't a valid string, then that path does not get serialized as JSON properly. Right. As an example. or if you get a string, it won't get serialized properly. So if you are ever deserializing bots, you are already putting in a restriction that those bots must be valid strings, right?

So you are not adding anything new here. And I think Mino kind of is a real improvement to anyone who does that. So I know that at Oxide, we use it a bunch. I've used it a bunch. But yeah, I think if you want... If you want to handle paths and you don't already know that you need to handle every possible path, then you should consider using Camino.

So you are not adding anything new here. And I think Mino kind of is a real improvement to anyone who does that. So I know that at Oxide, we use it a bunch. I've used it a bunch. But yeah, I think if you want... If you want to handle paths and you don't already know that you need to handle every possible path, then you should consider using Camino.

Sure, yeah. So both of this was just something that actually it was your code. I'm pretty sure it blamed you, Eliza. So I love bytes because it kind of presents this unified interface over. So bytes comes with a type called bytes, which represents this So it uses dynamic dispatcher under the hood, but it is a type that represents a contiguous sequence of bytes.

Sure, yeah. So both of this was just something that actually it was your code. I'm pretty sure it blamed you, Eliza. So I love bytes because it kind of presents this unified interface over. So bytes comes with a type called bytes, which represents this So it uses dynamic dispatcher under the hood, but it is a type that represents a contiguous sequence of bytes.