On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 10:22 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Right, but that doesn't really solve the problem when the rust bindings > get in the way of changes that you are currently making. Or if you break > them inadvertently. I do see benefits to that approach, but it's no > panacea. > > This seems to assume that time is plentiful and we can just add more to > our plate, which isn't always true. While I'd love to do more rust and > get more familiar with it, the time still has to be there for that. I'm > actually typing this on a laptop with a rust gpu driver :-) > > And this isn't just on me, there are other regular contributors and > reviewers that would need to be onboard with this. Indeed -- I didn't mean to imply it wouldn't be time consuming, only that it might be an alternative approach compared to having existing maintainers do it. Of course, it depends on the dynamics of the subsystem, how busy the subsystem is, whether there is good rapport, etc. > Each case is different though, different people and different schedules > and priorities. So while the above is promising, it's also just > annecdotal and doesn't necessarily apply to our case. Definitely, in the end subsystems know best if there is enough time available (from everybody) to pull it off. I only meant to say that the security angle is not the only benefit. For instance, like you said, the error handling, plus a bunch more that people usually enjoy: stricter typing, more information on signatures, sum types, pattern matching, privacy, closures, generics, etc. Cheers, Miguel
