Hacker News Reader

Sometimes, you can't make hard walls between subsystems. Some filesystems need very close interaction with memory management to have very good performance. Some objects are accessed and manipulated in a racy way from logically independent places for scalability reasons. I am not against Rust, modularity, etc. But building very high performance systems is just something different.

View on HN

But do you need this in the 99% of cases? Probably not. You can write productive, performant, and safe code in safe Rust fine.

If you do need to do something this exotic, the fundamentals don't change: you still need to take care of memory lifetimes, you still need to ensure thread safety, etc. I really don't think it's as all-or-nothing as you believe it to be.

You would encode that into types and expose a safe API. The usafe would still be local in scope.

For example you might build an abstraction named ReadWriteMutex that guarantees safe access at runtime.

I don't see a scenario where this would impede performances. The invariants to validate are the same. But rust would guarantee that it is memory safe.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com