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: <9b766fed-85cf-4c7c-b4b2-f20e6c1c41d9@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 13:22:12 -0800
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>,
 Yury Norov <ynorov@...dia.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
 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 1/27/26 1:10 PM, Gary Guo wrote:
> 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.

OK that sounds consistent anyway.

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard