bincode VS rust

Ermm... actually I meant something like this: playground, but then I realized it's basically (de)serialization, and I just found that we already have a crate for that: bincode.

One, figure out the bincode format (documented here: https://github.com/bincode-org/bincode/blob/trunk/docs/spec.md) and write your own parser. Maybe a one-off that specifically only handles this one data structure would be fairly straightforward.

Step 1: The Deserialize type requests data from the Deserializer with one of the deserialize_type methods. This gives it an opportunity to provide certain metadata about the type: structs provide a list of fields, enums provide a list of variants, tuples provide a length, etc. Some data formats (notably bincode) require this metadata to drive deserializing, as the wire format is not self-describing. Crucially, the Deserialize type also provides a visitor that is capable of receiving the requested data from the Deserializer.

Alternatively, give Bincode a try.

Like separate instructions? I was thinking if a instruction have unknown length I make sure I have some kind of header field that tells the data length of the instruction so receiver knows when next instruction starts. And I was planning on using Bincode with serde to serialize and dezerialize like structs and stuff.

Isn't this essentially bincode?

This is similar in practice to using abi_stable, and end-users will still receive compiled files, but your plugins will be sandboxed and a single build will work on all platforms. The downside is that it's a bit more work because WebAssembly's support for passing complex data types between the host and the WebAssembly code is in the preliminary stages, so you need to do something like using Serde to encode your data into something like Bincode or MessagePack (or JSON and friends) to hand it off between the host and the plugin.

What kind of access do you need to the data ? You should be able to make a safe api to the Vec class by iterating on in in chunks, and using a closure to translate data between u8 and other representations. ( f32, u32 has the fomr_ne_bytes() / to_ne_bytes() methods ) You could make a helper function that takes a format description ( i.e. "fffuucc" , and calculates the size of the chunk, and generates a closure for reading accessing the data, of the layout is completely dynamic. This closure could use an enum to wrap the different primitive types. ) Or if the layouts are known at compile time , you could use procedural macros to generate code for serializaion / deserialization inot the the [u8] , though https://crates.io/crates/bincode may already do that for you )

Apparently there's a lot of discussion going on about that (3 of the 4 open tickets on the bincode implementation are about it), for example this one.

Almost fixed the compiler: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123325

Rust: A secure, efficient, and modern programming language (omitting ten thousand words). You can simply follow the installation instructions provided on the official website.

Recently did something similar in Rust but for generating SVGs. We've adopted it for snapshot testing of cargo and rustc's output. Don't have a good PR handy for showing Github's rendering of changes in the SVG (text, side-by-side, swiping) but https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121877/files has newly added SVGs.

To see what is supported, see the screenshot in the docs: https://docs.rs/anstyle-svg/latest/anstyle_svg/

We strongly believe in Rust as a powerful language for building production-grade software, especially for systems like ours that run alongside Kubernetes.

The above Assert<{N % 2 == 1}> requires #![feature(generic_const_exprs)] and the nightly toolchain. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76560 for more info.

Another week, another dive into Rust. This time, we're delving into structs. Structs bear resemblance to interfaces in TypeScript, enabling the grouping of intricate data sets within an object, much like TypeScript/JavaScript. Rust also accommodates functions within these structs, offering a semblance of classes, albeit with distinctions. Let's delve into this topic.

There’s also other reasons. For example, take binary search:

* prefetch + cmov. These should be part of the STL but languages and compilers struggle to emit the cmov properly (Rust’s been broken for 6 years: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53823). Prefetch is an interesting one because while you do optimize the binary search in a micro benchmark, you’re potentially putting extra pressure on the cache with “garbage” data which means it’s a greedy optimization that might hurt surrounding code. Probably should have separate implementations as binary search isn’t necessarily always in the hot path.

* Eytzinger layout has additional limitations that are often not discussed when pointing out “hey this is faster”. Adding elements is non-trivial since you first have to add + sort (as you would for binary search) and then rebuild a new parallel eytzinger layout from scratch (i.e. you’d have it be an index of pointers rather than the values themselves which adds memory overhead + indirection for the comparisons). You can’t find the “insertion” position for non-existent elements which means it can’t be used for std::lower_bound (i.e. if the element doesn’t exist, you just get None back instead of Err(position where it can be slotted in to maintain order).

Basically, optimizations can sometimes rely on changing the problem domain so that you can trade off features of the algorithm against the runtime. These kinds of algorithms can be a bad fit for a standard library which aims to be a toolbox of “good enough” algorithms and data structures for problems that appear very very frequently. Or they could be part of the standard library toolkit just under a different name but you also have to balance that against maintenance concerns.