The Rune Programming Language • Hacker News Board

Re: The Rune Programming Language

#201

Post by joshuamorton » Mon, Nov 28, 2022, 11:41 PM UTC

halpmeh wrote: post #198

TylerE wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, now how do you provide a SecureUserCreatedStructuredData type?

Serialize SecureUserCreatedStructuredData into an array of SecureString (or SecureInt, etc).

What if I want my application to be performant? There's no value in c abi compatibility if the code internally costs a serialization round trip all the time. May as well just use rusts ffi at that point, it'll be faster!

Also how do you even operate on a SecureUserCreatedStructuredData that is serialized into a SecureString or SecureBytes?

Does my function that operates on a SecureUserCreatedStructureData take in a SecureString, which is documented as needing to be deserializable to a SecureUserCreatedStructureData? If so, that's just a secure void*, with all the problems void* has, and slower.

Re: The Rune Programming Language

#202

Post by yasyfm » Tue, Nov 29, 2022, 11:43 PM UTC

aflag wrote: post #117

henrydark wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not just operator overloading, there seems to be a monad-like "secret" that makes calls to func(a, ...) -> b with secret(a) return secret(b). The example doesn't spell this out explicitly, but I think those are the semantics of secret.

What makes that different from creating a Secret class that's just a container class and defines its own methods? I just don't see what it is that requires a new language to accomplish and couldn't just be implemented as a library in many of the pre-existing languages (including popular ones like C++).

I implemented it as a runtime class in Python just to see, seems like you can get a lot of (this benefit) in other languages by doing the same: https://github.com/yasyf/python-secret-type

Re: The Rune Programming Language

#203

Post by tom_ » Wed, Nov 30, 2022, 12:01 PM UTC

patrec wrote: post #200

tom_ wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The competence is assumed. The disappointment comes from people who are competent not doing the due diligence that some think should be par for the course when naming a project.

You seem to be a lot more saddened than I am that a nice two letter name wasn't successfully squatted for all eternity by a no longer maintained ultra obscure niche language that no one has ever heard of let alone used. Now perl stealing prolog's file extension on the other hand...

I don't have any particular opinion about Go. Just occurred to me there might be a more charitable interpretation of the comment.