661 karma · joined August 7, 2009
> the core protocol objects in quinn that directly link to specific socket and address and even event loop reactor objects - and these objects strictly in Rust to boot.
This isn't accurate. The core protocol objects in Quinn are those defined in "quinn-proto", which has absolutely no awareness of how I/O is performed or what event loop is in use: the interface is structurally very similar to Quiche's, with the caller providing data/timeouts by any means and consuming events that result. See https://docs.rs/quinn-proto/0.2.0/quinn_proto/struct.Endpoin... for details.
The high level "quinn" crate interface, which incorporates awareness of UDP sockets and the tokio event loop, is strictly an optional binding; that's why it's a separate crate.
> existing solutions available right now would not be able to offer the level of flexibility and abstraction we need, nor would they likely be able to add the interfaces we need in a reasonable timescale, nor would they likely tolerate our requests to do so.
Support for this type of flexibility, up to and including allowances for a C API suitable for integration with existing software, has actually been an express design goal of Quinn from the start, and I regret that that wasn't clear.
Sometimes the standard library doesn't expose functionality you want, like the capability to read/write the ECN bits of your UDP packets, so you have to bind some syscalls yourself. The capability to do this is one of Rust's core strengths, and it does not compromise a program's rustiness any moreso than calling a wrapper around write to print "Hello, world!" does.
Setting up a reproducible build environment with nix-shell is much more convenient than screwing around with containers.
This is actually easier to deal with on NixOS than elsewhere, because the tools for handling that case (patchelf, buildFHSUserEnv, supporting multiple versions of a lib, etc) are so well developed.
I like home-manager: https://github.com/rycee/home-manager
what
Datagrams can be easily and effectively encoded as discrete short-lived streams. If you need streams of datagrams, you can encode your own header to do that. I see no reason why this has to be built into the protocol when the provided primitives are sufficient.
> Forward error correction is actually cool but just using XOR is too limited.
Pretty sure FEC was removed from the IETF draft.
What? Return works exactly like it does in C, it's just not required as much.
> warning: unnecessary parentheses around `if` condition
I'm confused about how reducing the amount of required syntax is "gratuitous syntax."
32% return on investment sounds like a lot to me.
Well, there's your problem. HN consists mostly of web developers/startups.
This might be a more compelling argument if Go didn't ignore (more than) the last decade of PL research.