3 ms·
I agree. The Rust implementation even needs to use a few unsafe blocks (to work with UnsafeCells internally) but is mostly safe code. Other than that you can a
by nicholassm83 2y ago
I agree.
The Rust implementation even needs to use a few unsafe blocks (to work with UnsafeCells internally) but is mostly safe code. Other than that you can achieve the same in C++.
But I think the real benefit is that you can write the rest of your code in safe Rust.
- alchemist1e9 2y agoUnless the rest of your code is already in C++ and you’re interested in this new better disrupter implementation, that’s probably a common situation for people interested in this topic. Any recommendations for those in that situation? perhaps existing C++ implementations already match this idk.
- bluejekyll 2y agoWhile you’re not explicitly saying this, C++ in Rust’s terms, is all unsafe. In a multi-threading context like this, that’s even more important.
- nicholassm83 2y agoI'm trying to be polite. :-) And there is a lot of great C++ code and developers out there - especially in the e-trading/HFT space.
- zamalek 2y agoNit: C/++ is safer than Rust unsafe. There are constraints (no aliasing) that must be upheld in unsafe.