As an aside, because it would not be germane to automotive safety…
In the Coast Guard Auxiliary “Sailing and Seamanship” class that I attended, targeting would-be sailboat skippers, we were told the USS Ranger nuclear-powered aircraft carrier had the right-of-way.
I vividly recall a shot within a commercial, in which a driver was shown in slow motion, chucking his coffee into the passenger foot well in order to have two hands on the wheel for an emergency. I don’t remember what was about to happen to the car or the world around it. I’m pretty sure that a collision occurred.
Sure, but languages and the problems we solve with them are both multifaceted, so simply pointing to one tool and saying "this is better than the one you have in your toolbox" is fine, but the plural in "zero cost abstractions" kind of implies that most or all the tools are at parity or better.
It sounds like you're saying that you consider seeing this single instance of someone writing a library with a costly abstraction to be indicative of the entire language ecosystem not fitting the paradigm. This is kind of hard to take seriously; it's not like C++ doesn't have some costly abstractions as well way more embedded into the language itself (e.g. exceptions).
> someone writing a library with a costly abstraction
That's not what happened here.
> it's not like C++ doesn't have some costly abstractions
This is simultaneously both completely orthogonal to my observation that the Rust FFI is borked, and a great example of a problem that wouldn't happen in C++, because in C++ you could completely ignore the costly abstractions if necessary.
Yes, it's what happened here. The article is about debugging the author's own abstraction types that had some incorrect assumptions.
You do not need these wrapper types to call C functions. If the author had removed the complex extractions and called the extern "C" function directly (as is standard in Rust) there would not be the additional overhead.
> > someone writing a library with a costly abstraction
> That's not what happened here.
Yes it is. Where do you think the `FFISafe` type that they used came from? It's not anything inherent to how Rust does FFI; it's a type someone wrote in an attempt to try to provide an abstraction, and that abstraction happened to have a cost. There's absolutely no reason anyone has to use it in order to do FFI in Rust.
The time was taken by the code around the assembly language. It was an abstraction someone wrote in a way that happened not to be efficient. The ability of someone to write a costly abstraction doesn't take away from Rust any more than the possibility of doing that in C++ would from whether C++ has them.
It was caused by the code around it, but the actual CPU cycles stalled out in the assembly language, making it much harder to find the problem.
Is how I understood the post.
Anyway there's noting wrong with rust FFI. The overhead was because this function wanted to support two options and didn't implement that in the best way.
The company I worked for in the early 80’s was in the market for a CAD system, and they all had constraint systems in the UI, and showed them in the demos.
CAD people got this a long time ago, but, unfortunately, HTML people never did. Layout is a 2D constraint problem, but HTML/CSS approaches it as a procedural problem, partly because early browsers were so compute and bandwidth constrained.
CAD is great at parametric design, which gets significantly more complicated when the viewport changes shape.
Taking a procedural approach instead of solving constraints is necessary for folks to stay sane when they're trying to get the same website to work on phones and desktops.
It’s true that the POTUS is subject to the US courts. But I think it is fair to read TFA as a lament about an unwise assumption that is broader than “Biden wouldn’t have done certain things.” The organs of the EU should protect EU interests as if no nonEU organ ever agreed by default with the EU’s values.
In the Coast Guard Auxiliary “Sailing and Seamanship” class that I attended, targeting would-be sailboat skippers, we were told the USS Ranger nuclear-powered aircraft carrier had the right-of-way.
reply