Microsoft: Rust Is the Industry’s ‘Best Chance’ at Safe Systems Programming

Re:Microsoft: Rust Is the Industry’s ‘Best Chance’ at Safe S... by Cyph0n on Saturday June 13, 2020 @03:03PM (#23511795)

The rand and regex crates are two other examples. I would also prefer to have bindgen in the standard library.

I’d love to use Rust in the OS I work on, but integrating our build system with Cargo and dealing with external crates is a huge obstacle.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft: Rust Is the Industry’s ‘Best Chance’ at Safe S... by JoshTriplett on Saturday June 13, 2020 @04:57PM (#23512669)

> I would also prefer to have bindgen in the standard library.

That's a challenging one. I'd like to have native support for C integration as well, but we'll have to balance that with the stability of the corresponding clang interfaces, and the requirement to ship extra libraries that the Rust toolchain doesn't currently ship.

Working on it, though.

> The rand and regex crates are two other examples.

rand I'd agree with, though it would need paring down to not have as many dependencies. For regex, there are multiple tradeoffs to be made; for instance, the most popular regex crate is fast and does most of what people want but doesn't have backreferences or lookahead/lookbehind assertions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft: Rust Is the Industry’s ‘Best Chance’ at Safe S... by oefrha on Sunday June 14, 2020 @12:08AM (#23515047)

Question: is bindgen std quality yet? It seems there are still largely unsolved problems, e.g. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-bindgen/issues/1549 which is causing hundreds of warnings in a -sys crate of mine and for which I have no recourse.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft: Rust Is the Industry’s ‘Best Chance’ at Safe S... by Cyph0n on Saturday June 13, 2020 @11:52PM (#23514956)

> the requirement to ship extra libraries that the Rust toolchain doesn't currently ship.

Ah, that's something I did not consider...

[ Parent | on HN ]