Rust and Nix = easier Unix systems programming

Post by joehillen » Fri, Apr 15, 2016, 5:46 AM UTC

sickbeard wrote: post #50

masklinn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if the Rust developer uses fork().unwrap_or(default_value) in a hurry The point here is that the language's tools and APIs can significantly better drive the developer towards the safe/right solution, that's a large point of type theory and static type systems after all. In this case rust's type system is used to split out the various "result cases" and notify the developer upfront of the various cases to hand…

This has been proven to be wrong over and over again with the many variations of languages that came after C. Newer "safer" languages don't improve bugs

Post by kalmar » Fri, Apr 15, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

justincormack wrote: post #41

I maintain LuaJIT syscall bindings https://github.com/justincormack/ljsyscall - they cover quite a lot, namespaces, netlink and so on. I spent quite a bit of time making them more intuitive than the raw bindings, with consistent error handling, also namespacing constants and so on. It is definitely useful to have these types of interfaces not in C.

Post by justincormack » Sat, Apr 23, 2016, 9:37 AM UTC

kalmar wrote: post #83

justincormack wrote: post #41

I maintain LuaJIT syscall bindings https://github.com/justincormack/ljsyscall - they cover quite a lot, namespaces, netlink and so on. I spent quite a bit of time making them more intuitive than the raw bindings, with consistent error handling, also namespacing constants and so on. It is definitely useful to have these types of interfaces not in C.

This project looks really cool! I'm very curious to find out more about how you make sure constants are correct across platforms and architectures. I will be poking around!