ladyanita22

I wonder why is Go[1] considered object-oriented while Rust is not[2], when basically both have the same approach towards objects (struct + methods).

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(programming_language)

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_(programming_language)

What are the chances of this proposal making the cut?

This looks phenomenal!

But I understand that if this proposal makes the cut, other compilers would implement it too and make this universal. Seeing this seems to implement all of Rust’s safety features, this would seem like a win here.

In the article, it says "The Rust *struct* has a smaller size compared with the C due to the usage of smart pointers instead of allocating item memory inside the *struct*. We use *pahole* to identify that Rust *struct*s use fewer cache lines than their C counterpart."

As far as I know, you can also use pointers (not smart ones, that's a C++ thing) inside structs in C, right? Like this:

    struct student
    {
        char *name;
        int age;
        char *program;
        char *subjects[5];
    };

Oh, I agree on that. I'm sure had we kept our currency, we would have suffered much less.

I'm from Spain, so I'm quite sure of what I'm talking about. Spain might be a highly developed country, but its gdp per capita is not too high compared to the likes of Germany, UK, France, Denmark, US, et al.

Basque country is, again, rich because it has an special tax treatment and could be considered a tax heaven to some extent.

It's located in Spain, a country not known for its vast wealth. Plus, it's in a special administrative region in Spain, the Basque Country. They enjoy subsidies and favorable treatment from the regional government.

It'd seem Embark Studios is no longer interested in Rust? The timeframe also seems to coincide with the LogLog post earlier this year.

Why is it impossible in Rust? Do you have any source for that?

I thought the C version (U boot) did that as well. I guess it does not.

It's true that you can escape them though. There are some other small things (which AFAICT you can escape from to as well)

Fair enough

Everyone around here keeps talking about how the problem of Intel is that it was a Business guy running the company and not an engineer, and it feels so similar to when people claimed Phil Spencer was going to save Xbox.

Truth is, Pat is doing nothing despite the generous government subsidies

How's rust support on this?

I understand you're part of the Firefox development team?

Yeah, I'm very surprised with this statement, coming from someone I'd guess should be knowledgeable enough. Benchmarks claim otherwise, and I don't think there's a single overhead you cannot escape from using unsafe. I'm not sure what this person is talking about TBH

Quoting /u/mre__ on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1ebze8w/rust_in_produ...):

I wanted to highlight some memorable quotes from my chat with Jeremy, who's a principal engineer at System76 and creator of Redox OS 1:

"Even the most skilled C programmers struggle to write bug-free code. Vulnerabilities in foundational libraries like libc are still being discovered today."

"I have not seen a big movement, a large amount of developers moving over [from Rust] to any other languages. I haven't seen them move to Zig. So if I had to bet on it, I would bet on Rust being here in 10 years and being the dominant memory safe compiled language."

On embedded systems: "The embedded controllers, although there is a lot of interest in Rust, I don't think the security advantages are really there as much because you're not often dealing with third-party input. You're usually dealing with things that are very structured and have fixed sizes and even C code can deal with those quite well."

His call to the Rust community: "Please stick with your projects. Please stop abandoning your Rust projects. It has been somewhat of a trend that a very nice new Rust crate will be created and the developer will spend a couple days to fill it out and then it will be left forever dead but still available on the crates.io website."

I feel seen on the last point. ^

Google is rewriting HarfBuzz and FreeType in Rust

The author of HarfBuzz has published [State of Text Rendering 2024](https://behdad.org/text2024/), where he [describes](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UnR2zKf3Z_DDRS6vLgBkSHUe...) the ongoing rewrite of the entire open-source text rendering stack in Rust which is funded by Google Fonts.

The motivations for it are laid out at https://github.com/googlefonts/oxidize, and the actual code is at https://github.com/googlefonts/fontations. The individual crates are already published to crates.io, too!

The intent does seem to be to completely replace the C/C++ code in HarfBuzz and FreeType in Android and Chrome, which would be a massive win for security. Numerous other HarfBuzz/FreeType users such as Firefox and all the Linux desktop would also benefit.

Curiously, Microsoft is rewriting their proprietary font parsing code in Rust as well: https://redd.it/12yg3cp

Isn't that what std:simd is for Rust?

But zig lacks the intrinsics support, and not ever single simd spec is exposed on the abstraction.

I have compared C, C++, Zig and Rust to see which one is the fastest in a recursive division benchmark.

The repo is open source, so any suggestions are welcome, as well as PRs and whatever issue you might want to file. I'd kindly request you that, if any performance optimizations may apply to more than one language, please let me know, as I want to keep things fair.

Apparently it's due to some checks you cannot escape from in Rust when using inclusive ranges.

See more: https://www.kosalab.dev/tidbits/rust-inclusive-ranges

Anyone with experience on Rust for ESP32 controllers could chime in on whether this is feasible on rust as well?

Really surprised to know that Microsoft Surface's UEFI implementation is transitioning to Rust

Not yet, but I'll soon

I'll write something an post it here in HN

Soon I'll write something and publish it.

Why choosing Rust?

Basically this is written in C