I am not saying that Rust shouldn't become (or is not already) a C++ replacement.
-
-
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
I am saying that measuring Rust's success on whether or not a good javascript engine has been written in Rust is silly.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
Your point seems to be that
#rustlang will have one only when all C++ code is replaced. I am saying that's a silly yardstick.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth
George Makrydakis Retweeted George Makrydakis
No, that's your silly, hasty reading inferring that, here is the tweet, implying nothing of sorts:https://twitter.com/irrequietus/status/749486119331528704 …
George Makrydakis added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @irrequietus
Yes it does. You advocate replacing all C++ in Servo. That is not a very useful goal, for reasons I stated above.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
Not a very useful goal for either Servo or Rust.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
Would I *like* spidermonkey to be in Rust? Yes. Do I think it's a worthwhile goal to write a new one in Rust? No.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
(Replacing some of it with Rust is something I think is worthwhile, though)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
This is not because Rust is unsuitable. This is because Javascript engines take years of optimization efforts,
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @irrequietus
and JITs are inherently unsafe. So Rust isn't a win (not a loss, but not a win either) for some core components,
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
A JIT isn't inherently unsafe. You can prove a JIT produces correct + safe code. Look at compcert for example.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.