Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 08:25:26 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org> To: Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org> Cc: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rust: kernel vs user-space Message-ID: <88AC3419-2BD0-4664-80E8-368360E143B4@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <40836902-cb68-45e0-b4ec-623c21aa47ba@FreeBSD.org> References: <40836902-cb68-45e0-b4ec-623c21aa47ba@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4 Sep 2024, at 17:42, Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > The LUA version is much shorter and easier to understand (if you know > LUA) I am far from a Lua expert. I started using it quite recently because the be= st choice for a build system for the RTOS I maintain was written in Lua. I f= ind it overly verbose at times, but, in spite of this, I rarely have problem= s reading other people=E2=80=99s Lua code. It took me about an hour to go from never having written any Lua to writing s= ome Lua code that actually worked (and that we still use). I see that as a h= uge advantage. There=E2=80=99s a lot of C code in the base system that took m= e ages to understand. Some, such as rtld, because it=E2=80=99s intrinsically= complicated (though the fact that the authors are allergic to documentation= doesn=E2=80=99t help: there are subtle phase ordering things there that sho= uld not have been committed without comments explaining what invariants futu= re changes must preserve) but a lot of command-line tools are doing things t= hat are fairly simple but the code is significantly complicated by the fact t= hat C lacks abstractions for them and so implementation detail of data struc= tures is interleaved with algorithms. David=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?88AC3419-2BD0-4664-80E8-368360E143B4>