Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 13:36:54 -0700 From: Chris <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> Cc: Jan Knepper <jan@digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Delany <x9k@charlie.emu.st>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rust: kernel vs user-space Message-ID: <be6ed80e5126d1a194635eca7f578e61@bsdforge.com> In-Reply-To: <20240904221522.63E0366@slippy.cwsent.com> References: <0.2.0-final-1725440949.866-0xb4bb20@qmda.emu.st> <78BC157F-6E30-49C4-931D-9EB539BD0322@digitaldaemon.com> <20240904221522.63E0366@slippy.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2024-09-04 15:15, Cy Schubert wrote: > In message <78BC157F-6E30-49C4-931D-9EB539BD0322@digitaldaemon.com>, Jan > Kneppe > r writes: >> D >> >> www.dlang.org > > The problem with D is data structure definitions need to also be mirrored > (duplicated) in D. For example, when 64-bit inodes were implemented D > failed to build and generate any code. The reason for this was > ufs/ufs/inode.h now defined 64-bit inodes while the D representation as > provided by the D language were still 32-bit. I had opened an issue with > upstream regarding this. To this day they still haven't figured out how to > implement 64-bit inodes on newer FreeBSD systems while maintaining 32-bit > inode backward compatibility on older FreeBSD systems (as FreeBSD > implemented this using ifunc). > Well, why about B? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_(programming_language) Sorry. I remembered using this *many* years ago, and couldn't resist adding it to the list. :-) --Chris > > -- > Cheers, > Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> > FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org> Web: https://FreeBSD.org > NTP: <cy@nwtime.org> Web: https://nwtime.org > > e^(i*pi)+1=0 > > >> >> >> >> ManiaC++ >> Jan Knepper >> >> > On Sep 4, 2024, at 05:09, Mark Delany <x9k@charlie.emu.st> wrote: >> >=20 >> > =EF=BB=BFI hesitate to step into this discussion but is it worth making th= >> e distinction between >> > Rust in the kernel and Rust in user-space? >> >=20 >> > I can see the argument for introducing a "safer" language into the kernel a >> = >> nd there are >> > very few candidates available: perhaps only Rust, C++ and Zig. Clearly if t >> = >> hat step is to >> > be made, it probably should pick one language and run with it. >> >=20 >> > That's one discussion. >> >=20 >> > As for user-space, I find the rationale for Rust as the one-true-language-= >> after-C far less >> > compelling as many CLIs and server programs can just as well be written in= >> more accessible >> > languages such as go or perl or java or... >> >=20 >> > Frankly I no longer write any CLI or server code in C even after decades o= >> f doing so >> > because the trade-off between development costs and performance is far les= >> s compelling in >> > user-space. If my once-a-week invocation of a command requires a bit more m >> = >> emory and CPU >> > than one written in C, is that really important compared to how much easie= >> r the command is >> > to maintain and enhance? >> >=20 >> > Point being, on the matter of introducing Rust to FreeBSD, I think the dis= >> tinction between >> > kernel and user-space is worth keeping in mind as they are quite different= >> problems. >> >=20 >> >=20 >> > Mark. >> >=20 >> >>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?be6ed80e5126d1a194635eca7f578e61>