A native Rust stack would be great. It's a challenge faced by other languages like Python. I think it's important to start small, and drive such projects by incremental improvements.
I'd definitely not consider performance as an initial goal. Rather, API quality and protocol compatibility. It may be that an API oriented towards socket types rather than an abstract BSD-style socket is better for instance. -Pieter On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Charles Remes <li...@chuckremes.com> wrote: > There was a little twitter chat over the weekend regarding an attempt at > writing a ground-up zeromq library using the new systems language Rust. If > you haven't heard of Rust, it is a new language under development by the good > folks at Mozilla. It's original designer has said that he has learned quite a > few things from implementing dozens of languages over the years that he felt > he could solve some new problems and create a cleaner language. Rust is his > attempt at such a feat. > > It supposedly solves the problem by borrowing the best from many popular > languages. > > * OOP of C++ without the large, unwieldy syntax > > * performance of C while providing good namespacing, OOP, safe memory > (i.e. no dangling pointers) > > * the functional expressiveness of Haskell but not at the expense of > imperative forms > > * the massive concurrency of Erlang but with a better syntax and a > more flexible memory model (borrowed pointers, immutable defaults, etc) > > I recently did a small test project to learn the syntax. The language is > still evolving, so it's a bit of a moving target. It's at release 0.9 with a > 1.0 slated for later this year, but they've already slipped on delivering a > 1.0 for at least a year so I assume it will slip again. > > Anyway, I'd like to volunteer to try and spike a simple example to get things > started. However, I'd like to start a thread here to discuss "lessons > learned" from the existing codebase. We already have a great write-up from > Martin Sustrik (primary author of earlier versions of zeromq) here: > > http://250bpm.com/blog:4 > > http://250bpm.com/blog:8 > > I'm hoping that others who have read through the source have additional > insights that they'd like to share. For instance, I have seen comments that > zeromq might have more consistent performance it it was wrapped around a > Disruptor (google for that pattern if it's new to you). People also seem to > really dislike the concept of the context (nanomsg has already eliminated > this... it still exists but is hidden by the library). > > Any other insights? > > cr > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
