Discofork
Repository brief

tokio-rs/tokio

Read the upstream summary on the left, browse the cached forks below it, and load each fork comparison into the right-hand panel.

Cached analysis
cached 2026-03-30T16:01:26.930Z
1mo ago

tokio-rs/tokio

Tokio is a large, actively maintained Rust workspace for building asynchronous applications. It targets reliable, scalable async runtime use cases and includes a runtime, macros, stream, test, and utility crates, plus docs, examples, benches, stress tests, and integration tests. The repository is very mature and widely adopted, with 31,492 stars and 2,983 forks, and it was updated on 2026-03-30.

GitHub
Loading tags...
Stars31,492
Forks2,983
Default branchmaster
Last pushed2026-03-30T09:05:53Z
Recommended shortcuts

Jump straight into Discofork's strongest cached fork picks, or open a compare view in one click.

Forks

Choose a fork to inspect

10 of 10 fork briefs
Selected

Choose this fork only if you specifically need WasmEdge-oriented Tokio behavior or must preserve its older compatibility choices. For general Rust async development, upstream Tokio is the safer choice because it is much more current and less divergent.

Prefer this fork only if you must stay on an old Tokio lineage for compatibility. For new work or active maintenance, upstream Tokio is the clear choice.

Prefer this fork if you need Solana-tailored Tokio behavior and are prepared to carry a significant downstream maintenance burden. Prefer upstream if you want the broadest feature set, freshest fixes, and easiest long-term maintenance.

Prefer this fork if you specifically need stall-detection instrumentation plus Anthropic’s publishing workflow; prefer upstream if you want the newest Tokio features, platform fixes, and lower long-term maintenance burden.

Prefer upstream Tokio for almost all adopters. Choose this fork only if you need one of its specific runtime or macro adjustments and are prepared to own an aging, heavily behind codebase.

Prefer this fork only if you specifically want the Semgrep workflow and are comfortable carrying a very stale copy of Tokio. For general adoption, upstream is the better choice because this fork adds almost nothing beyond security scanning while lagging far behind.

Prefer the upstream Tokio unless you explicitly need this fork’s older behavior or custom edits and are prepared to maintain a heavily diverged runtime yourself. For new adoption, the staleness and missing upstream work are major negatives; for legacy compatibility, it may be useful as a frozen baseline.

Adopt this only if you specifically need the 2025-04 fork state. For production or active development, upstream is the better choice because this fork adds nothing and is substantially behind.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically need this exact older snapshot. This fork adds no visible functionality and is materially behind, so adopters inherit upstream lag without any compensating fork-specific benefit.

Prefer this fork only if you need its custom runtime/sync behavior and can own the maintenance burden. For most adopters, upstream Tokio is the safer choice because this fork is far behind and appears to remove or rewrite major runtime pieces.