rune VS miri

A Lisp, a weird dialect of Lisp, is not better than Lua. Why use Rune [0]?!

[0]: https://rune-rs.github.io/

This is what I based my comment on - https://github.com/rune-rs/rune/issues/444

Late start today as well. I really thought today would be the day that I'd have to abandon my goal of no heap allocations. But, luckily I had an arena allocator available that I could fairly easily adapt to store data on the stack. And with some tweaks we have today's solution:

I'd have given you bonus points for using a rust styled scripting language like rune but that's pretty neat still

As note about using rust syntax for scripting: https://rune-rs.github.io/

I know you said you don’t want to embed another language but IMO Rune is worth a consideration here. It can be a pretty thin abstraction over rust by passing native structs to scripts and calling methods on them. The syntax and semantics are very close to rust so it feels natural. https://github.com/rune-rs/rune

The biggest technical difference I'd say is that Rune uses a stack-based machine which makes adding deep C support somewhat obvious while Rhai performs AST walking to execute scripts.

Here is the repro I ended up writing to validate the problem if anyone wants to take it for a spin.

Provenance is a dynamic property of pointer values. The actual underlying rules that a program must follow, even when using raw pointers and `unsafe`, are written in terms of provenance. Miri (https://github.com/rust-lang/miri) represents provenance as an actual value stored alongside each pointer's address, so it can check for violations of these rules.

Lifetimes are a static approximation of provenance. They are erased after being validated by the borrow checker, and do not exist in Miri or have any impact on what transformations the optimizer may perform. In other words, the provenance rules allow a superset of what the borrow checker allows.

There has been discussion of doing this with MIRI, which would be easier than all of rustc.

This issue has been fixed: https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2964

Actually, I've done more advanced tests with MIRI (see https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2920 for example) which allowed me to fix some issues. I've also made the code compatible with loom, but I didn't found the time yet to write and execute loom tests. That's on the TODO-list, and I need to track it with an issue too.

He is one of the big brains behind Miri, which is a interpreter that runs on the MIR (compiler representation between human code and asm/machine code) and detects undefined behavior. Super useful tool for language safety, pretty interesting on its own.

I would also run your tests in Miri (https://github.com/rust-lang/miri) to try to cover more bases.

You can run miri and it will tell you if the given run triggered any undefined behavior. It will not analyze it for every possible use of the code, but checking for the presence of this specific issue using it should be fairly simple.

If you do encounter a piece of code on which TB performs much worse than SB, do submit it as an issue! There was one recently and we massively improved TB performance on this case by improving garbage collection.