Graydon Hoare wrote:
* C functions that scan for null are inefficient, so they're even more
> likely to be replaced with Rust equivalents than other C functions.
Hm, I think this is not a reasonable stance:
$ find/usr/include/ -name \*.h \
| xargs cat \
| grep -c 'char\( *const\)\? *\*'
10488
There are a lot of C APIs that take strings. "Rewrite the world in rust"
is going to take a long time.
Also guessing that C code is slow because of NUL-termination searches
needs evidence. Over my ~30 years of C/Unix I've heard this but I've
never seen such evidence. Maybe I missed it!
/be
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
