3 ms·

SIMD, lock free data structures, and ARC pointers are great. But what's the timeline for concurrent IO (either async or coroutines)? Preferably one that is stab

SIMD, lock free data structures, and ARC pointers are great. But what's the timeline for concurrent IO (either async or coroutines)? Preferably one that is stable, portable, and efficient (mio isn't the first two). >Statically preventing data races is an enormous leap forward in the state of the art The borrow checker is a great achievement. But it doesn't prevent deadlocks. And because Rust doesn't provide higher level concurrency tools than threads and mutexes, deadlocks are going to be a significant problem in practice until such tools are standardized.

burntsushi 11y ago
> But it doesn't prevent deadlocks. Could you describe how you've developed the misconception that Rust does prevent deadlocks? Whatever it is, we should try to fix it right away, because Rust has never tried to prevent deadlocks, and suggesting that it does is not good. > And because Rust doesn't provide higher level concurrency tools than threads and mutexes Rust's standard library has channels.
- acconsta 11y ago
  This is all a response to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10192042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10192042 Reasonable people can disagree about what "safe" and "easy" mean, but I don't think Rust's concurrency primitives are either given the (very real, very bad) possibility of deadlock. >Rust's standard library has channels. Which are a good start, but only a partial solution without coroutines (and the other additions you mentioned).
  - burntsushi 11y ago
    > but I don't think Rust's concurrency primitives are either given the (very real, very bad) possibility of deadlock. OK. Then I don't know what to say. An infinite loop is a deadlock. Unless you have a programming language that can guarantee termination, you can't prevent deadlocks statically. So yes, I think a brief marketing pitch of "safe and easy concurrency" is totally appropriate given the domain Rust is shooting for. In fact, it is one of Rust's strengths, so to not advertise it as such would be quite odd. > Which are a good start, but only a partial solution without coroutines (and the other additions you mentioned). OK. But you said "And because Rust doesn't provide higher level concurrency tools than threads and mutexes" which just isn't true. I'm trying to clear up what it is Rust does have. I'm not saying it has everything. Writing software takes time.
    - acconsta 11y ago
      >An infinite loop is a deadlock It isn't. I don't know what else to say: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock

burntsushi 11y ago

> But it doesn't prevent deadlocks. Could you describe how you've developed the misconception that Rust does prevent deadlocks? Whatever it is, we should try to fix it right away, because Rust has never tried to prevent deadlocks, and suggesting that it does is not good. > And because Rust doesn't provide higher level concurrency tools than threads and mutexes Rust's standard library has channels.

acconsta 11y ago
This is all a response to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10192042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10192042 Reasonable people can disagree about what "safe" and "easy" mean, but I don't think Rust's concurrency primitives are either given the (very real, very bad) possibility of deadlock. >Rust's standard library has channels. Which are a good start, but only a partial solution without coroutines (and the other additions you mentioned).
- burntsushi 11y ago
  > but I don't think Rust's concurrency primitives are either given the (very real, very bad) possibility of deadlock. OK. Then I don't know what to say. An infinite loop is a deadlock. Unless you have a programming language that can guarantee termination, you can't prevent deadlocks statically. So yes, I think a brief marketing pitch of "safe and easy concurrency" is totally appropriate given the domain Rust is shooting for. In fact, it is one of Rust's strengths, so to not advertise it as such would be quite odd. > Which are a good start, but only a partial solution without coroutines (and the other additions you mentioned). OK. But you said "And because Rust doesn't provide higher level concurrency tools than threads and mutexes" which just isn't true. I'm trying to clear up what it is Rust does have. I'm not saying it has everything. Writing software takes time.
  - acconsta 11y ago
    >An infinite loop is a deadlock It isn't. I don't know what else to say: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock