linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] rust: add `bitfield!` macro

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <DFZOHYP9I47G.14DDKPXUOU4V0@garyguo.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 21:10:39 +0000
From: "Gary Guo" <gary@...yguo.net>
To: "John Hubbard" <jhubbard@...dia.com>, "Alexandre Courbot"
 <acourbot@...dia.com>, "Yury Norov" <ynorov@...dia.com>
Cc: "Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@...nel.org>, "Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
 "Gary Guo" <gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron
 <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>, "Andreas
 Hindborg" <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
 "Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>,
 "Yury Norov" <yury.norov@...il.com>, "Alistair Popple"
 <apopple@...dia.com>, "Joel Fernandes" <joelagnelf@...dia.com>, "Timur
 Tabi" <ttabi@...dia.com>, "Edwin Peer" <epeer@...dia.com>, "Eliot Courtney"
 <ecourtney@...dia.com>, "Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
 "Dirk Behme" <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>, "Steven Price"
 <steven.price@....com>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] rust: add `bitfield!` macro

On Tue Jan 27, 2026 at 9:03 PM GMT, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 1/27/26 1:57 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Tue Jan 27, 2026 at 11:55 AM JST, Yury Norov wrote:
>> <snip>
>> 
>> So while we cannot achieve exactly the short syntax above (which has its
>> drawbacks as well, such as the inability to operate in const context),
>> we can introduce a new setter than works with a const argument and
>> spares us the need to invoke `Bounded::new` ourselves:
>> 
>>      let color = Rgb::default().
>>              .with_red::<0x10>()
>>              .with_green::<0x1f>()
>>              .with_blue::<0x18>()
>
> Are we sure that .with_red is a better name than, say, .set_red()?
>
> "with" is not so easy to remember, because it is a bit
> surprising and different, for setting a value.
>
> "with" feels like a function call or closure: "sort with
> qsort", for example. But here we are setting a color
> component.

`set_foo` implies that the value is mutated in place (and takes `&mut self`).
`with_foo` implies that value is returned with the specific thing changed. For
example, `pointer::with_addr`, `Path::with_extension`.

Given the signature in the API I would agree with Yury that `with_` is better.

Best,
Gary


>
> thanks,
> John Hubbard