too-many-lists
liburing | too-many-lists | |
---|---|---|
30 | 219 | |
2,659 | 3,051 | |
- | 1.1% | |
9.6 | 0.0 | |
4 days ago | 14 days ago | |
C | Rust | |
MIT License | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
liburing
- Liburing 2.6 Released
-
Io Uring
I've tinkered around with io_uring on and off for the last couple years. But I think it's really becoming quite cool (not that it wasn't cool before... :)). This was a really interesting post on what's new https://github.com/axboe/liburing/wiki/io_uring-and-networki.... The combination of ring-mapped buffers and multi-shot operations has some really interesting applications for high-performance networking. Hoping over the next year or two we can start to see really bleeding edge networking perf without having to resort to using DPDK :)
-
Why you should use io_uring for network I/O
Thought I was doing something wrong at first, but after looking at examples and code, I just wasn't able to reach the epoll numbers. Looking on the Github page, there a few issues there with people who found the same thing, with their own examples. #1, #2
-
Use io_uring for network I/O
To address my own silly questions, yes, one should use the new fixed buffers described in this document: https://github.com/axboe/liburing/wiki/io_uring-and-networki...
-
The fastest rm command and one of the fastest cp commands
We're working on this! https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/830
- axboe / liburing
-
io_uring and networking in 2023
Link: https://github.com/axboe/liburing/wiki/io_uring-and-networking-in-2023
too-many-lists
-
Towards memory safety with ownership checks for C
You seem to have a preset opinion, and I'm not sure you are interested in re-evaluating it. So this is not written to change your mind.
I've developed production code in C, C++, Rust, and several other languages. And while like pretty much everything, there are situations where it's not a good fit, I find that the solutions tend to be the most robust and require the least post release debugging in Rust. That's my personal experience. It's not hard data. And yes occasionally it's annoying to please the compiler, and if there were no trait constraints or borrow rules, those instances would be easier. But way more often in my experience the compiler complained because my initial solution had problems I didn't realize before. So for me, these situations have been about going from building it the way I wanted to -> compiler tells me I didn't consider an edge case -> changing the implementation and or design to account for that edge case. Also using one example, where is Rust is notoriously hard and or un-ergonomic to use, and dismissing the entire language seems premature to me. For those that insist on learning Rust by implementing a linked list there is https://rust-unofficial.github.io/too-many-lists/.
-
Command Line Rust is a great book
Advent of Code was okay until I encounterd a problem that required a graph, tree or linked list to solve, where I hit a wall. Most coding exercises are similar--those requiring arrays and hashmaps and sets are okay, but complex data structures are a PITA. (There is an online course dedicated to linked lists in Rust but I couldn't grok it either). IMO you should simply skip problems that you can't solve with your current knowledge level and move on.
-
[Media] I'm comparing writing a double-linked list in C++ vs with Rust. The Rust implementation looks substantially more complex. Is this a bad example? (URL in the caption)
I feel obligated to point to the original cannon literature: https://rust-unofficial.github.io/too-many-lists/
-
Need review on my `remove()` implementation for singly linked lists
I started learning Rust and like how the compiler is fussy about things. My plan was to implement the data structures I knew, but I got stuck at the singly linked list's remove() method. I've read the book as well, but I have no clue how to simplify this further:
-
Factor is faster than Zig
My impression from the article is that Zig provides several different hashtables and not all of them are broken in this way.
This reminds me of Aria's comment in her Rust tutorial https://rust-unofficial.github.io/too-many-lists/ about failing to kill LinkedList. One philosophy (and the one Rust chose) for a stdlib is that this is only where things should live when they're so commonly needed that essentially everybody needs them either directly or to talk about. So, HashTable is needed by so much otherwise unrelated software that qualifies, BloomFilter, while it's real useful for some people, not so much. Aria cleaned out Rust's set of standard library containers before Rust 1.0, trying to keep only those most people would need. LinkedList isn't a good general purpose data structure, but, it was too popular and Aria was not able to remove it.
Having multiple hash tables feels like a win (they're optimized for different purposes) but may cost too much in terms of the necessary testing to ensure they all hit the quality you want.
-
Was Rust Worth It?
> Cyclic references can be dealt with runtime safety checks too - like Rc and Weak.
Indeed. Starting out with code sprinkled with Rc, Weak, RefCell, etc is perfectly fine and performance will probably not be worse than in any other safe languages. And if you do this, Rust is pretty close to those languages in ease of use for what are otherwise complex topics in Rust.
A good reference for different approaches is Learn Rust With Entirely Too Many Linked Lists https://rust-unofficial.github.io/too-many-lists/
- What are some of projects to start with for a beginner in rust but experienced in programming (ex: C++, Go, python) ?
-
How to start learning a systems language
Second, once you've finished something introductory like The Book, read Learning Rust With Entirely Too Many Linked Lists. It really helped me to understand what ownership and borrowing actually mean in practical terms. If you don't mind paying for learning materials, a lot of people recommend Programming Rust, Second Edition by Blandy, Orendorff, and Tindall as either a complement, follow-up, or alternative to The Book.
- My team might work with Rust! But I need good article recommendations
-
Conversion?
Learning Rust With Entirely Too Many Linked Lists which highlights a lot of the differences with how you need to structure your code in Rust compared to other languages.
What are some alternatives?
tokio-uring - An io_uring backed runtime for Rust
rust - Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.
libevent - Event notification library
Rustlings - :crab: Small exercises to get you used to reading and writing Rust code!
libuv - Cross-platform asynchronous I/O
book - The Rust Programming Language
io_uring-echo-server - io_uring echo server
CppCoreGuidelines - The C++ Core Guidelines are a set of tried-and-true guidelines, rules, and best practices about coding in C++
linux-aio - How to use the Linux AIO feature
easy_rust - Rust explained using easy English
go - The Go programming language
x11rb - X11 bindings for the rust programming language, similar to xcb being the X11 C bindings