linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] [RFC] Rust support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 18 Apr 2021 16:51:24 +0100
From:   Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...gle.com>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, ojeda@...nel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] [RFC] Rust support

On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 04:21:27PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Well, I can't express how much I hate abstractions because I constantly
> need to know what it's doing under the hood, and I spend my time reading
> the output asm code because I always want to confirm my assumptions about
> the compiler not cheating on me (and not hitting one of its bugs),
> especially after C compilers have become so smart that they completely
> replace your code with what they think is better for you, (including
> nothing),

I understand the feeling. One thing I can say about the abstractions we've been
talking about is that they're zero-cost. So you'd still have the ability to
inspect generated code and relate that to source, although it would still be
subject to optimisations like C (or perhaps more optimisations as the compiler
knows more about the code).

> so I guess all of this is really not for someone like me.

This may indeed be the case. But I'd invite you to try it out for yourself
anyway before discounting it. I used to hate destructors in C++ because they
were called implicitly: C was king because I had full control. Now I find myself
publicly backing Rust. I feel the advantages outweigh the cost.

> However while I'm pretty sure that based on our respective experiences
> we'd probably disagree forever on a wide number of approaches when it
> comes to deciding whether the developer or the compiler should have the
> last say, I sincerely appreciate that you take the time to calmly explain
> your differing views and the rationale behind, so many thanks for this!

Thank you. I also appreciate your willingness to engage with us.

Cheers,
-Wedson