Re: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-17 Thread Mike Beckerle
gt; > > Creating a Rust backend makes sense, although we don’t think there is a > > Rust to hardware path – at least none that we are aware of. What did you > > mean by the phrase “basis for generating VHDL or System Verilog?” > > > > John > > > > F

Re: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-16 Thread Adam Rosien
gt; Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 5:13 AM > To: John Interrante > Cc: dev@daffodil.apache.org > Subject: EXT: Rust vs. C backend > > John, > > What's your view of generating Rust vs. Generating C from DFDL? > > Those of us working in Cyberia, well, the edict has

Re: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-16 Thread Adam Rosien
been ported to, > and > > > how often you need to call C functions from Rust, which means having to > > use > > > Rust's Foreign Function Interface. Otherwise, Rust is better than C > for > > > new code and Daffodil should have a Rust backend. > >

Re: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-16 Thread John Wass
C functions from Rust, which means having to > use > > Rust's Foreign Function Interface. Otherwise, Rust is better than C for > > new code and Daffodil should have a Rust backend. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Beckerle > > Sent: Friday,

Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-16 Thread Interrante, John A (GE Aerospace, US)
pt platforms where a Rust compiler isn't available) while continuing to support all DFDL schemas. John -Original Message- From: Mike Beckerle Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 5:43 AM To: dev@daffodil.apache.org Subject: EXT: Re: Rust vs. C backend John, what do you (or anyone?) know

Re: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-16 Thread Mike Beckerle
than C for > new code and Daffodil should have a Rust backend. > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Beckerle > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2024 5:50 AM > To: dev@daffodil.apache.org > Subject: EXT: Re: Rust vs. C backend > > what I meant by "What did you mean by the phrase

Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-12 Thread Interrante, John A (GE Aerospace, US)
ng to use Rust's Foreign Function Interface. Otherwise, Rust is better than C for new code and Daffodil should have a Rust backend. -Original Message- From: Mike Beckerle Sent: Friday, January 12, 2024 5:50 AM To: dev@daffodil.apache.org Subject: EXT: Re: Rust vs. C backend what

Re: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-12 Thread Mike Beckerle
ust to hardware path – at least none that we are aware of. What did you > mean by the phrase “basis for generating VHDL or System Verilog?” > > John > > From: Mike Beckerle > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 5:13 AM > To: John Interrante > Cc: dev@daffodil.apache.org

RE: Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-11 Thread Interrante, John A (GE Aerospace, US)
System Verilog?” John From: Mike Beckerle Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 5:13 AM To: John Interrante Cc: dev@daffodil.apache.org Subject: EXT: Rust vs. C backend John, What's your view of generating Rust vs. Generating C from DFDL? Those of us working in Cyberia, well, the edict has

Rust vs. C backend

2024-01-11 Thread Mike Beckerle
John, What's your view of generating Rust vs. Generating C from DFDL? Those of us working in Cyberia, well, the edict has been issued that only memory-safe languages/runtimes are allowed to reduce risk of cyber-attacks via things like libc flaws. Seems to me that Rust is the lowest level languag