Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rewrite Everything in Rust

robert.ocallahan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 242 posts

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#21

Post by JoshTriplett »

rtpg wrote: post #6
dkhenry wrote: post #2

I have actually started to do this to see for myself how much work it would be http://blog.dkhenry.com/2016/02/17/deciding-to-rewrite-getad...

Thanks for doing this... I think the way to tackle a rust glibc rewrite: Step 0 - write a code generator that just generates rust code that call the C versions of glibc symbols ( based off of the publicly exposed API in the library files). Get test suite to run Step 1 - Make that rust code generate a 100% drop-in replacement fro the C symbols (maybe this requires injecting version numbers) Step 2 - write the `getaddr…

For step 0, look at Rust's libc crate.

For step 1, you'd need to carefully look at glibc's ABI, which is even more complicated than its API due to backward compatibility and symbol versioning.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#22

Post by ktRolster »

pcwalton wrote: post #11
panic wrote: post #9

I think this misses the real problem. So many pieces of foundational software like glibc and OpenSSL are understaffed, underfunded, and plagued by terrible code. Go read glibc getaddrinfo: it's a mess! Rewriting the software in Rust would not solve these problems any more than rewriting it in C++ would. A rewrite would clean up the code, sure, but then you're left in the same situation, only with brand new bugs that…

> A rewrite would clean up the code, sure, but then you're left in the same situation, only with brand new bugs that nobody has time to fix. The entire point is that you're not in the same situation regarding memory safety problems/vulnerabilities.

Memory safety problems are the low-hanging fruit of vulnerabilities. A re-write by unskilled programmers will not guarantee the code is safe, because they will introduce many other kinds of vulnerabilities.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#23

Post by wspeirs »

pcwalton wrote: post #11
panic wrote: post #9

I think this misses the real problem. So many pieces of foundational software like glibc and OpenSSL are understaffed, underfunded, and plagued by terrible code. Go read glibc getaddrinfo: it's a mess! Rewriting the software in Rust would not solve these problems any more than rewriting it in C++ would. A rewrite would clean up the code, sure, but then you're left in the same situation, only with brand new bugs that…

> A rewrite would clean up the code, sure, but then you're left in the same situation, only with brand new bugs that nobody has time to fix. The entire point is that you're not in the same situation regarding memory safety problems/vulnerabilities.

Agreed, the hope is that the combination of Rust + a rewrite, you'd be in a MUCH better place than where we are now.

I think an interesting question is, why are there so many contributors to the Linux Kernel in comparison to something like glibc? Both, I'd argue, are equally foundational.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#24

Post by cls59 »

geofft wrote: post #3

It's certainly possible to incrementally rewrite an OS distribution in Rust, or even smaller projects like glibc. Anyone want to set up the infrastructure so it's easy to take a library or a .c file and start hacking, and see if you still get a working OS in the end? I suppose part of the problem is defining "working OS" -- I'm not sure I know of any great test suites that check to see that a GNU/Linux distribution c…

How about a re-write of coreutils in Rust?

https://github.com/uutils/coreutils

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#25

Post by Elv13 »

geofft wrote: post #3

It's certainly possible to incrementally rewrite an OS distribution in Rust, or even smaller projects like glibc. Anyone want to set up the infrastructure so it's easy to take a library or a .c file and start hacking, and see if you still get a working OS in the end? I suppose part of the problem is defining "working OS" -- I'm not sure I know of any great test suites that check to see that a GNU/Linux distribution c…

> or even smaller projects like glibc.

Umm, "smaller"

> incrementally rewrite

It is GNU LibC, even if your rewrite is GPLv1337, the toolchain isn't "free enough" for them. You will be "stopped by verbal force" in the sake of preserving an inferior, but "free" core library.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#26

Post by carussell »

Do user studies.

It's pretty much unheard of, but nearly every open source project would benefit far more from a week of watching potential contributors trying to get up to speed than it would from making sure the project roadmap is delivered a week sooner.

That's my claim for projects in general, and what you're asking for re Rust is a little different, but the approach can applied there, too. Focus on everything from navigating the project website and other docs, to interactions with the tools that make up the "ecosystem", to programmer expectations that could shape the language (with the latter actually being the least important).

Don't trust users to self-report. Don't overestimate your ability to make a combined diagnosis and prescription, and don't underestimate how much silent resignation is killing your adoption rate. Observe and work off real notes.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#27

Post by justinmk »

panic wrote: post #9

I think this misses the real problem. So many pieces of foundational software like glibc and OpenSSL are understaffed, underfunded, and plagued by terrible code. Go read glibc getaddrinfo: it's a mess! Rewriting the software in Rust would not solve these problems any more than rewriting it in C++ would. A rewrite would clean up the code, sure, but then you're left in the same situation, only with brand new bugs that…

This is why I personally think the OSS community should be more encouraging of "salary" style funding. There is a loud, poisonous minority of advocates that seem to think that asking for money is just plain evil. That attitude is a material disservice to OSS in general: it makes OSS weaker and less capable, for the sake of some weird puritan reflex.

N.B.: I have never and will never ask for, nor accept any income from OSS work: too much shit-flinging and absurd expectations. But as a _user_ I want OSS, for its own sake, to re-evaluate its attitude towards money.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#28

Post by thinkpad20 »

na85 wrote: post #19

Is there a "glibrust" or equivalent standard library for Rust, yet?

Rust of course has a standard library[0] and it includes a libc, but (I might be wrong here) I think the libc portion is FFI into glibc or similar. I think the stuff written in rust is considerably more high-level, focusing more on data structures, concurrency, string manipulation, etc.

[0]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#29

Post by mtgx »

panic wrote: post #9

I think this misses the real problem. So many pieces of foundational software like glibc and OpenSSL are understaffed, underfunded, and plagued by terrible code. Go read glibc getaddrinfo: it's a mess! Rewriting the software in Rust would not solve these problems any more than rewriting it in C++ would. A rewrite would clean up the code, sure, but then you're left in the same situation, only with brand new bugs that…

Maybe 20 years from now it would get into the same situation, but the point is in those 20 years it could be a lot easier to maintain. Also, the whole point of Rust is to eliminate some classes of bugs, which means there would literally be orders of magnitude fewer bugs to deal with.

So I don't think that saying there will be bugs in the new libraries, too, is fair criticism.

Also, what's clear is that Linus Torvalds' "just don't be stupid and write incorrect code" policy doesn't work. We need to think of security from a design point of view, not rely on your average programmer to write academically perfect code as a security policy.

Re: Rewrite Everything in Rust

#30

Post by bitL »

1: So a new generation, new rewrite of everything... Then hitting brand new problems (sometimes old ones avoided by previous designs) not foreseen by majority. A new language spawns with the coming of a new generation, addressing some of these problems. Rewrites everything. Hits another set of problems. Goto 1.
Post reply on HN