[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] [GSoC] Question on "Rust implementation of GNUne

From: Jeff Burdges
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] [GSoC] Question on "Rust implementation of GNUnet utils" project
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 14:27:48 +0200

On Mon, 2016-04-25 at 11:31 +0200, Sree Harsha Totakura wrote:
> On 04/25/2016 01:36 AM, Jeff Burdges wrote:
> > I think either gj or eventual.  It's ultimately your call.  :)
> I used mio before and it provides an event loop.  What are the benefits
> of using gj or eventual over mio?

Both eventual and gj provide futures/promises independent of the event
loop used to implement them, so they fit well with the usual GNUnet
style, and tie us down less than anything else.  You instantiate them
with eventual_io and gjio respectively. 

Actually eventual_io is just a wrapper on mio, but gjio forked off it's
own event loop (+1 for eventual).  It's easy to convert between them as
they're both the same style really, so it's no big deal if we change our
minds, but gj is stricter by not giving its types Send bounds, i.e.
using Rc<> over Arc<> (+1 for gj). 

It doesn't matter much really.  In fact, I kinda suspect eventual and gj
might be merged if Rust ever gets higher-kinded types.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]