Skip to content

Conversation

@istankovic
Copy link

@istankovic istankovic commented May 23, 2025

In particular, wyhash has been released which moves to rand 0.9, which brings quite a few of breaking changes. Luckily, we don't depend on it too much so the move is trivial. Also bump the MSRV to 1.63 to be in sync with getrandom and rand.

@istankovic istankovic changed the title chore: update dependencies to latest versions chore: update dependencies to latest versions and bump MSRV to 1.63 May 23, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@taiki-e taiki-e left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR!

run: cargo build --no-default-features --features alloc --target thumbv7m-none-eabi
- name: Test wasm
run: wasm-pack test --headless --chrome
run: RUSTFLAGS='--cfg getrandom_backend="wasm_js"' wasm-pack test --headless --chrome
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unfortunately, the fact that this flag is needed indicates that the getrandom upgrade needs to be considered a breaking change for our crate as well...

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, true, I'm afraid there's no way around that.

@istankovic
Copy link
Author

@taiki-e would it be possible to merge this and release a new major version (3.0, since this is a breaking change) soon-ish?

@dignifiedquire
Copy link

any updates on this?

@taiki-e
Copy link
Collaborator

taiki-e commented Sep 29, 2025

I think what we should do here is the same as what's proposed in ring. (i.e., vendoring the getrandom WASM code.)

In particular, wyhash has been released which moves to rand 0.9, which
brings quite a few of breaking changes. Luckily, we don't depend on it
too much so the move is trivial.
@istankovic
Copy link
Author

I think what we should do here is the same as what's proposed in ring. (i.e., vendoring the getrandom WASM code.)

Why? I'm not sure what value that would bring, but I do see the downside of adding more complexity and maintenance burden to fastrand. The discussion in ring seems to have to do with specifics in ring so I'm not sure what the relation to this crate is.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants