Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2018 09:36:18 -0800 From: Enji Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Eric McCorkle <eric@metricspace.net>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Speculative: Rust for base system components Message-ID: <713BA6E4-1C4E-4890-831F-6379D3AB4425@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfrMY73-7vK6F6q-iPdW7EOUP8CPThkyxwOoOWedyMu5Ag@mail.gmail.com> References: <ca76e5f7-6e59-bd67-144a-90ad66f0252e@metricspace.net> <CANCZdfrMY73-7vK6F6q-iPdW7EOUP8CPThkyxwOoOWedyMu5Ag@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] > On Dec 31, 2018, at 7:02 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: …. > TBH, there's a stronger case for python than rust: there's actual python > scripts in the tree today that we have to install a port to use. And there > the benefit, while not zero, is small and the effort is large compared to > just dragging it in as a port, so it hasn't been done. It's another fast > evolving language that requires multiple versions as well... > > So write something that everybody wants, that must be in base, and that > requires rust, and then we can have the conversation… As someone who has been using python extensively over the past decade, I think that using python versions less than 3.7 without type hints to ensure that the data types are correct [1], mocked tests to ensure that the code functions and is tested, is the wrong path to make. Rust is still a young language, but it has a number of benefits in terms of: i. Being able to scale past JIT python. This fact doesn’t matter on workstations/servers, but it definitely matters on the low end with embedded systems and the upper end with distributed systems at scale (there’s a reason why a number of critical services at my previous longterm employment were written in C++, not python. Some argue Rust can outperform C/C++ [2]. C++ I can see (managed pointers were about an order of magnitude less performant in a microbenchmark I wrote for grabbing the time in the Linux kernel vs malloc in C using llvm36). However, outperforming C is up for debate. ii. It is easier to grok than C++ (even the most recent versions of the C++ spec, the language is cryptic in areas). iii. It is more reusable than C out of the box. How often do we need to rewrite common logic/routines in C and mimic an OOP language like C++ (see libarchive, pkgng)? <offtopic> At the end of the day, I think the key is that the FreeBSD project needs to start expressing more complicated subsystems in terms of OOP languages, like C++, Rust, etc, instead of expressing most of the code in C. I do think (for instance) a service management system would be a good candidate for modern C++ or Rust. </offtopic> Cheers, -Enji 1. https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/ <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/>; 2. https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/5urar1/is_rust_likely_the_next_fastest_language_after_c/ <https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/5urar1/is_rust_likely_the_next_fastest_language_after_c/>; [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE5bk3FaGcY5rvqmb79YOpJmkwhhUFAlwqU5IACgkQ9YOpJmkw hhVtHw/+IvKHRnJaUQnSKrVPvYkOcJIdWPfo9NEPp3rArjYDI7igHdqsWoimZvn3 HsIG6D/Uv7u9Nh9//f1KA9Ru06pv8F57+6PoPU7/Rndm/tOCnfA50Ta8Mz9Z0Cvg H7bNqpQj27yc0xNgruPNl/Y52mOotBtBvgRY5llEepdjcckV0wn4TOVr4JoNEqgi wItiM970n/TGRDIqOuEQnP+WmiaDO5xuJcKrzh7TV7Vwk2IPOW4TTSlomkvZQeHO ddHhrwTYjlpw9inrnBcP3IdmQObI5D/GE1gLCLfOd2HKWZfjAKCPQwudMH7jBKWH If+s50q6r6bzOxdCxKEDiVyiFIug5pAKScq5zdeSizAEg4h/ph1eTJdUshxRU4ed mY7aoIPAu0evyzqXXor2t5/GXGPIAV4rtNjQo/a9p4SsPBhsxUAWxmmU+wxdc2Z9 XXgNkKV7WXERCrGGeDsZGVLF1cdzrQmSp5A0wQSlSYstlURwJe7f8AZArdQvfyiU Lb7SzZXpLvD5lTaTjqY4f7dqsDWgmGPQw7JbAcCPkhqsOfcnPk6u/JJLFKpkqDyk OA8tTVe2cswKBHmXij6aEX/0eXKzJJnT70XZPH6JZ1Og8PXpIV+eWTrwc+AIrOd8 dpSFVuaz2YmkcSHHNsvoY3VQp7lraBjLWtBcSw0i/5WOOn5bZlI= =LrDW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?713BA6E4-1C4E-4890-831F-6379D3AB4425>