3 ms·
>This is why we shouldn't be writing new code in C. Depends on your priorities. I'd take occasional bugs over jitter, latency, CPU inefficiency, and excess mem
by ksk 9y ago
>This is why we shouldn't be writing new code in C.
Depends on your priorities. I'd take occasional bugs over jitter, latency, CPU inefficiency, and excess memory usage. And all that in practical terms means C is very environmentally friendly.
- iknowstuff 9y agoChoose Rust. It has zero-overhead memory and data race safety.
- ksk 9y agoI suppose so. As an embedded developer it appeals to me, but I haven't looked too much into it TBH. Do you know of any analysis done on the bugs in servo or any other large-ish project?
- iknowstuff 9y agoI haven't studied this extensively, but Mozilla made the following claim: >Mozilla made two previous attempts to parallelize its style system in C++, and both of them failed. But Rust’s fearless concurrency has made parallelism practical! https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/11/14/Fearless-Concurrency-In-Firefox-Quantum.html https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/11/14/Fearless-Concurrency-I...
- ksk 9y agoRight, I just wanted to examine it in the 'proof is in the pudding' sense where if Rust is as good as people claim, then certain types of bugs would be entirely eliminated. I'm usually weary of such claims :)