Busd Taking Shape As A D-Bus Broker Written In Rust

[skeevy420]

Have you noticed that Rust fans only know how to rewrite pieces of software and rarely create something new?

What do you expect? Y'all keep telling them to "rewrite it in Rust" and then y'all get upset when they do it

[skeevy420]

Not sure if they should stay with the name. Or I do pronounce it wrong. But it sounds like BuzzDee for me and that is very similar to Busty 😳

That's how it's pronounced in the video. Skip ahead to the 20 minute mark. Hopefully the fact that the developer pronounces it in a video means we won't end up with yet another ISO situation where people incorrectly say the letters I S O instead of the correct pronunciation that sounds like eye-so. ISO is based on the Greek work isos which is pronounced ess-os and means equal. They do it that way because the "International Organization of Standards" acronym changes based on the language used so they created a shorthand name and logo that's one capitalized word, ISO.

[darkonix]

I love how they don't show the (terrible) memory usage or the (terrible) CPU usage. It can be just as fast as dbus, but you can't get the same memory/CPU footprint from a managed language as you can with trusty, safe C. I remember the days when very clever programmers would even rely on assembly to optimize their programs. Now you have these snowflakes even pushing back against that or, worse, replacing the well-crafted assembly with (EW) Rust.

Rust is at least nice because it segments all of the non-coders into one group.

Maybe because Rust doesn't has that problem? If you are implying that Rust has runtime memory management like Java or Go, that's not true.

[bug77]

I love how they don't show the (terrible) memory usage or the (terrible) CPU usage. It can be just as fast as dbus, but you can't get the same memory/CPU footprint from a managed language as you can with trusty, safe C. I remember the days when very clever programmers would even rely on assembly to optimize their programs. Now you have these snowflakes even pushing back against that or, worse, replacing the well-crafted assembly with (EW) Rust.

Rust is at least nice because it segments all of the non-coders into one group.

If you were trying to tell us you didn't even get to the "zero-cost abstractions" part of the Rust docs, you succeeded.
And yes, the premier reason Rust exists is that C is "safe".

[zeenix147]

I love how they don't show the (terrible) memory usage or the (terrible) CPU usage. It can be just as fast as dbus, but you can't get the same memory/CPU footprint from a managed language as you can with trusty, safe C.

Rust is NOT a managed language. I didn't show memory usage because there was no reason to. If you have done any research whatsoever, you'd know that Rust's performance comes pretty close to C (even better than C++).

I remember the days when very clever programmers would even rely on assembly to optimize their programs. Now you have these snowflakes even pushing back against that or, worse, replacing the well-crafted assembly with (EW) Rust.

Push back where? Do you see any assembly in the dbus-broker or dbus-daemon code? We snowflakes also write unsafe code where it bring performance benefits and even write C or assembly when needed.

[ahrs]

I love how they don't show the (terrible) memory usage or the (terrible) CPU usage. It can be just as fast as dbus, but you can't get the same memory/CPU footprint from a managed language as you can with trusty, safe C. I remember the days when very clever programmers would even rely on assembly to optimize their programs. Now you have these snowflakes even pushing back against that or, worse, replacing the well-crafted assembly with (EW) Rust.

Rust is at least nice because it segments all of the non-coders into one group.

Rust is a systems programming language and it has an "unsafe" escape hatch that allows for all the same weird tricks you can do in C, including playing with raw/dangling pointers, etc. It can be just as fast as a good implementation in C but obviously needs to be similarly optimised in order to do so.

[mobadboy]

I love how they don't show the (terrible) memory usage or the (terrible) CPU usage. It can be just as fast as dbus, but you can't get the same memory/CPU footprint from a managed language as you can with trusty, safe C. I remember the days when very clever programmers would even rely on assembly to optimize their programs. Now you have these snowflakes even pushing back against that or, worse, replacing the well-crafted assembly with (EW) Rust.

Rust is at least nice because it segments all of the non-coders into one group.

[yoshi314]

Have you noticed that Rust fans only know how to rewrite pieces of software and rarely create something new?

https://github.com/rust-unofficial/awesome-rust - well, depends on where you look. i bet there are tons of obscure projects we have no idea about. or boring ones - since rust aims to be a boring, memory safe language to use.

i would assume that in any language majority of projects are simply reimplementations for most common use-cases. and nobody bats an eye.

[bug77]

Have you noticed that Rust fans only know how to rewrite pieces of software and rarely create something new?

Rust is mostly meant to be a systems programming language. What "new" do you need in that area? What "new" are you expecting in any area, really?

On a more serious note, a DBus broker seems like a premier candidate for Rust, memory errors in such a component can open some serious holes in a system.

[geerge]

Have you noticed that Rust fans only know how to rewrite pieces of software and rarely create something new?

Your mom loved my rust code when I showed it to her last night.