gnunet-developers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] [GSoC] Question on "Rust implementation of GNUne


From: Kelong Cong
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] [GSoC] Question on "Rust implementation of GNUnet utils" project
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 00:06:31 +0200

Some of you may already know, but I've been selected to participate in
GSoC. So I'm looking forward to working with the team this summer!

>From now until 23rd of May is the community bounding period. Thus I'm
thinking of doing the following to prepare. Please let me know if I
should add anything.
- Become more proficient in Rust, possibly by choosing Rust for some of
my upcoming university assignments.
- Learn more about GNUnet, esppecially the parts that are relevant to
GSoC.

There are also some things that I'd like to clarify.
- Is it confirmed that we'll use gj going forward?
- What's the development process going to be like? Is it making pull
requests on the gnunet-rs repository?

Kelong


On Thu, 2016-04-14 at 15:25 +0200, Jeff Burdges wrote:
> I've learned slightly more about our asynchronous IO options.  I'll
> give
> some notes below, but the short version is :
> 
> We should *first* trying using gj for a Rust implementation of GNUnet
> utils because it's actually the most restrictive callback-like event
> loop.  It'll be easier to migrate from gj to anything else. 
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> Notes :
> 
> 
> There are interesting features of both eventual_io vs gj : 
> - Eventual provides the abstraction layer that Christian and Andrew
> expressed an interest in. 
> - Cap'n proto has an interesting RPC facility built on gj.
> 
> And they differ with how they interact with threads :
> - Eventual imposes Send bounds frequently, so that types can move
> between threads.  As it better abstracts thread pools, but you must
> use
> Arc<> types lots.
> - Anywhere that eventual needs an Arc<>, gj uses its non Send cousin
> an
> Rc<>.  
> 
> It follows gj cannot interact as flexibly with threads, but really
> Rc<>
> should be viewed as "more thread safe" because you're forbidden from
> sharing them between threads at all.  In particular, it's easier to
> migrate code based on gj over to eventual that the reverse. 
> 
> It's easier to make eventual code run on top of another thing, like
> say
> a state machine, but that's unlikely.  And porting gj code to
> eventual
> code appears really trivial if one wishes to do is that way.  And
> gj's
> restrictions would help if making the transition more manually.
> 
> We should hold off starting the Cap'n proto RPC conversation since it
> does not pertain to existing GNUnet services, but it add extremely
> interesting long-term options. 
> 
> There is a good chance Rust gains higher-kinded types within the next
> couple years, which should enable eventual to be polymorphic over
> bounds, and might precipitate a merger of eventual and gj.  
> 
> > 
> > Futures 
> > https://github.com/carllerche/eventual_io
> > - No docs, but eventual has docs :
> >   https://carllerche.github.io/eventual/eventual/index.html
> > - Three contributors, seven if you consider eventual.  By mio guy
> > 
> > Promises 
> > https://github.com/dwrensha/gj 
> > - Some docs : http://docs.capnproto-rust.org/gj/index.html
> > - Just one contributor.  He works at Sandstorm.io
> 
> We should probably avoid coroutines, meaning no mioco, since we
> should
> not need that messy extra flexibility for GNUnet's proposes.  Also,
> Christian expressed reservations about building on APIs significantly
> more powerful than necessary.
> 
> > 
> > Coroutines 
> > https://github.com/dpc/mioco
> > - Most examples by far.  Okay docs :
> >   http://dpc.pw/mioco/mioco/index.html
> > - Nine contributors, quite active.
> 
> There are folks singing the praises of state machines, like
> https://engineering.shopify.com/17488160-why-developers-should-be-for
> ce-fed-state-machines
> And they do have greater advantages in Rust, like helping eliminate
> even
> Rc<> wrappers.  I suspect however that our code in GNUnet is largely
> higher level than where they really shine. 
> 
> > 
> > State Machine
> > https://github.com/tailhook/rotor
> > - Best docs by far, including design blog, but fewer examples :
> >   https://tailhook.github.io/rotor/rotor/index.html
> > - Eight contributors, quite active.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNUnet-developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]