Indeed. It's the one cultural aspect of Rust I find exhausting. Huge fan of the language and the community in general, but a few widespread attitudes do drive me nuts:

* That adding dependencies is something you should take very lightly

* The everybody uses or should use crates.io for dependencies

* That it's OK to just ask users to use the latest release of something at all times

* That vendoring code is always a good thing when it adds even the slightest convenience

* That one should ship generated code (prominent in e.g. crates that use FFI bindings)

* The idea that as long as software doesn't depend on something non-Rust, it doesn't have dependencies

Luckily the language, the standard library and the community in general are of excellent quality.

Yes, basically. Someone who is a dependency maximalist (never write any code that can be replaced by a dependency) then you can easily end up with a thousand dependencies. I don't like things being that way, but others do.

It's worth noting that Rust's std library is really small, and you therefore need more dependencies in Rust than in some other languages like Python. There are some "blessed" crates though, like the ones maintained by the rust-lang team themselves (https://crates.io/teams/github:rust-lang:libs and https://crates.io/teams/github:rust-lang-nursery:libs). Also, when you add a dependency like Tokio, Axum, or Polars, these are often ecosystems of crates rather than singular crates.

Tl;dr: Good package managers end up encouraging micro-dependencies and dependency bloat because these things are now painless. Cargo is one of these good package managers.

> like how on earth is sixteen dependencies means no dependencies lol

You're counting optional dependencies used in the binaries which isn't fair (obviously the GUI app or the backend of the webui are going to have dependencies!). But yes 3 dependencies isn't literally no dependency.