Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust

Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by anarazel on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @11:08PM (#14758446)

> Creating a new module or UDF requires exporting new special symbols for V1 calling convention.

Right - but I don't think you need to do so. That'd only be required if you'd use language 'C' - why not instead use language 'rust'. That'll force a simple wrapper function which looks up and calls the real function, but that's fairly harmless, no? Might actually be good, because you can do some extra checks and conversions there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by jeffdavis on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @11:27PM (#14758496)

There are some extension APIs that demand C. But perhaps I dismissed the idea of plrust too quickly and there is room for both?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by anarazel on Thursday July 13, 2017 @12:24AM (#14758684)

I'd say it'd be better to let PL handlers decide whether they can be used in those cases. IIRC those cases largely exist because you need to be able to deal with pointers which existing pls weren't able to...

[ Parent | on HN ]