News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on When Zig is safer and faster than Rust. Parent comment

Re:When Zig is safer and faster than Rust by likeabbas on Tuesday March 07, 2023 @01:29PM (#35059102)
> I usually find myself wishing I could have some macro where I just write in C and have it exposed as an unsafe back in Rust.

There’s a macro for doing this with Assembly, I can imagine one could be made for C. But why wouldn’t you just write unsafe rust at that point?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:When Zig is safer and faster than Rust by mjamil on Tuesday March 07, 2023 @01:55PM (#35059506)
Perhaps because you want to import something you don’t want to rewrite? There’s a lot of tested C code out there.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:When Zig is safer and faster than Rust by likeabbas on Wednesday March 08, 2023 @11:49AM (#35071351)
That's a good point.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:When Zig is safer and faster than Rust by brundolf on Tuesday March 07, 2023 @03:39PM (#35060884)
Colocation, and avoiding the ceremony of standing up all the extern types (and integrating a separate C compiler, etc)
[ Parent | on HN ]