Google is advocating for widespread adoption of memory-safe programming languages like Rust, Go, Swift, and Java to enhance software security. They highlight memory safety vulnerabilities as a significant source of security flaws, impacting a wide range of software, including critical infrastructure. The blog post calls for collaborative efforts across the industry, including open-source communities and standards organizations, to establish and promote memory safety standards, develop better tooling, and encourage a gradual shift away from memory-unsafe languages like C and C++. This transition is presented as essential for securing the future of software development and mitigating persistent vulnerabilities.
MichiganTypeScript is a proof-of-concept project demonstrating a WebAssembly runtime implemented entirely within TypeScript's type system. It doesn't actually execute WebAssembly code, but instead uses advanced type-level programming techniques to simulate its execution. By representing WebAssembly instructions and memory as types, and leveraging TypeScript's type inference and checking capabilities, the project can statically verify the behavior of a given WebAssembly program. This effectively transforms TypeScript's type checker into an interpreter, showcasing the power and flexibility of its type system, albeit in a non-practical, purely theoretical manner.
Hacker News users discussed the cleverness of using TypeScript's type system for computation, with several expressing fascination and calling it "amazing" or "brilliant." Some debated the practical applications, acknowledging its limitations while appreciating it as a demonstration of the type system's power. Concerns were raised about debugging complexity and the impracticality for larger programs. Others drew parallels to other Turing-complete type systems and pondered the potential for generating optimized WASM code from such TypeScript code. A few commenters pointed out the project's connection to the "ts-sql" project and speculated about leveraging similar techniques for compile-time query validation and optimization. Several users also highlighted the educational value of the project, showcasing the unexpected capabilities of TypeScript's type system.
The Dashbit blog post explores the practicality of embedding Python within an Elixir application using the erlport library. It demonstrates how to establish a connection to a Python process, execute Python code, and handle the results within Elixir. The author highlights the ease of setup and basic interaction, while acknowledging the performance limitations inherent in this approach, particularly the serialization overhead. While suitable for specific use cases like leveraging existing Python libraries or integrating with Python-based services, the post cautions against using it for performance-critical tasks. Instead, it recommends exploring alternative solutions like dedicated Python services or rewriting performance-sensitive code in Elixir for optimal integration.
Hacker News users discuss the practicality and potential benefits of embedding Python within Elixir applications. Several commenters highlight the performance implications, questioning whether the overhead introduced by the bridge outweighs the advantages of using Python libraries. One user suggests that using a separate Python service accessed via HTTP might be a simpler and more performant solution in many cases. Another points out that the real advantage lies in gradually integrating Python for specific tasks within an existing Elixir application, rather than building an entire system around this approach. Some discuss the potential usefulness for data science tasks, leveraging existing Python tools and libraries within an Elixir system. The maintainability and debugging aspects of such hybrid systems are also brought up as potential challenges. Several commenters also share their experiences with similar integration approaches using other languages.
The blog post "Gleam, Coming from Erlang" explores the author's experience transitioning from Erlang to Gleam, a newer language built on the Erlang Virtual Machine (BEAM). It highlights Gleam's similarities to Erlang, such as its functional nature, immutability, and the benefits of the BEAM ecosystem like concurrency and fault tolerance. However, the author emphasizes key differences, primarily Gleam's static typing, more approachable syntax inspired by Rust and Elm, and its focus on clearer error messages. While acknowledging some current limitations in tooling and library availability compared to Erlang's mature ecosystem, the post ultimately presents Gleam as a promising alternative for building robust, concurrent applications, particularly for developers coming from other statically-typed languages who might find Erlang's syntax challenging.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed interest in Gleam, praising its friendly syntax and the benefits it inherits from the Erlang ecosystem, like the BEAM VM. Some saw it as a potentially strong competitor to Elixir, appreciating its stricter type system and simpler tooling. A few users familiar with Erlang questioned the necessity of Gleam, suggesting that learning Erlang directly might be more worthwhile. Performance comparisons with Elixir and other BEAM languages were also a topic of discussion, with some expressing hope for benchmarks. A recurring sentiment was curiosity about Gleam's potential to attract a larger community and gain wider adoption. Several commenters also appreciated the author's candid comparison between Gleam and Erlang, finding the article helpful for understanding Gleam's niche.
Neut is a statically-typed, compiled programming language designed for building reliable and maintainable systems software. It emphasizes simplicity and explicitness through its C-like syntax, minimal built-in features, and focus on compile-time evaluation. Key features include a powerful macro system enabling metaprogramming and code generation, algebraic data types for representing data structures, and built-in support for pattern matching. Neut aims to empower developers to write efficient and predictable code by offering fine-grained control over memory management and avoiding hidden runtime behavior. Its explicit design choices and limited standard library encourage developers to build reusable components tailored to their specific needs, promoting code clarity and long-term maintainability.
HN commenters generally express interest in Neut, praising its focus on simplicity, safety, and explicitness. Several highlight the appealing aspects of linear types and the borrow checker, noting similarities to Rust but with a seemingly gentler learning curve. Some question the practical applicability of linear types for larger projects, while others anticipate its usefulness in specific domains like game development or embedded systems. A few commenters express skepticism about the limited standard library and the overall maturity of the project, but the overall tone is positive and curious about the language's potential. Performance, particularly relating to garbage collection or its lack thereof, is a recurring point of discussion, with some wondering about the potential for optimizations given the linear type system.
Clojure offers a compelling blend of practicality and powerful abstractions. Its Lisp syntax, while initially daunting, promotes code clarity and conciseness once mastered. Immutability by default simplifies reasoning about code and facilitates concurrency, while the dynamic nature allows for rapid prototyping and interactive development. Leveraging the vast Java ecosystem provides stability and performance, and the focus on functional programming principles encourages robust and maintainable applications. Ultimately, Clojure empowers developers to build complex systems with elegance and efficiency.
HN commenters generally agree with the author's points on Clojure's strengths, particularly its simple, consistent syntax, powerful data structures, and the benefits of immutability and functional programming for concurrency. Some discuss practical advantages in their own work, citing increased productivity and fewer bugs. A few caution that Clojure's unique features have a learning curve and can make debugging more challenging. Others mention Lisp's historical influence and the powerful REPL as key benefits, while some debate the practicality of Clojure's immutability and the ecosystem's reliance on Java. Several commenters highlight Clojure's suitability for specific domains like data processing and web development. There's also discussion around tooling, with some praise for Clojure's tooling and others mentioning room for improvement.
The author explores several programming language design ideas centered around improving developer experience and code clarity. They propose a system for automatically managing borrowed references with implicit borrowing and optional explicit lifetimes, aiming to simplify memory management. Additionally, they suggest enhancing type inference and allowing for more flexible function signatures by enabling optional and named arguments with default values, along with improved error messages for type mismatches. Finally, they discuss the possibility of incorporating traits similar to Rust but with a focus on runtime behavior and reflection, potentially enabling more dynamic code generation and introspection.
Hacker News users generally reacted positively to the author's programming language ideas. Several commenters appreciated the focus on simplicity and the exploration of alternative approaches to common language features. The discussion centered on the trade-offs between conciseness, readability, and performance. Some expressed skepticism about the practicality of certain proposals, particularly the elimination of loops and reliance on recursion, citing potential performance issues. Others questioned the proposed module system's reliance on global mutable state. Despite some reservations, the overall sentiment leaned towards encouragement and interest in seeing further development of these ideas. Several commenters suggested exploring existing languages like Factor and Joy, which share some similarities with the author's vision.
This 2015 blog post demonstrates how to leverage Lua's flexible syntax and metamechanisms to create a Domain Specific Language (DSL) for generating HTML. The author uses Lua's tables and functions to create a clean, readable syntax that abstracts away the verbosity of raw HTML. By overloading the concatenation operator and utilizing metatables, the DSL allows users to build HTML elements and structures in a declarative way, mirroring the structure of the output. This approach simplifies HTML generation within Lua, making the code cleaner and more maintainable. The post provides concrete examples showing how to define tags, attributes, and nested elements, offering a practical guide to building similar DSLs for other output formats.
Hacker News users generally praised the article for its clear explanation of building a DSL in Lua, particularly appreciating the focus on leveraging Lua's existing features and metamechanisms. Several commenters shared their own experiences and preferences for using Lua for DSLs, including its use in game development and configuration management. One commenter pointed out potential performance considerations when using this approach, suggesting that precompilation could mitigate some overhead. Others discussed alternative methods for building DSLs, such as using parser generators. The use of Lua's setfenv was highlighted, with some acknowledging its power while others expressing caution due to potential debugging difficulties. A few users also mentioned other languages like Fennel and Janet as interesting alternatives to Lua for similar purposes.
This blog post chronicles the author's weekend project of building a compiler for a simplified C-like language. It walks through the implementation of a lexical analyzer, parser (using recursive descent), and code generator targeting x86-64 assembly. The compiler handles basic arithmetic operations, variable declarations and assignments, if/else statements, and while loops. The post emphasizes simplicity and educational value over performance or completeness, providing a practical example of compiler construction principles in a digestible format. The code is available on GitHub for readers to explore and experiment with.
HN users largely praised the TinyCompiler project for its educational value, highlighting its clear code and approachable structure as beneficial for learning compiler construction. Several commenters discussed extending the compiler's functionality, such as adding support for different architectures or optimizing the generated code. Some pointed out similar projects or resources, like the "Let's Build a Compiler" tutorial and the Crafting Interpreters book. A few users questioned the "weekend" claim in the title, believing the project would take significantly longer for a novice to complete. The post also sparked discussion about the practical applications of such a compiler, with some suggesting its use for educational purposes or embedding in resource-constrained environments. Finally, there was some debate about the complexity of the compiler compared to more sophisticated tools like LLVM.
The blog post "It is not a compiler error (2017)" explores a subtle bug related to floating-point comparisons in C++. The author demonstrates how seemingly innocuous code, involving comparing a floating-point value against zero after decrementing it in a loop, can lead to unexpected infinite loops. This arises because floating-point numbers have limited precision, and repeated subtraction of a small value from a larger one might never exactly reach zero. The post emphasizes the importance of understanding floating-point limitations and suggests using alternative comparison methods, like checking if the value is within a small tolerance of zero (epsilon comparison), or restructuring the loop condition to avoid direct equality checks with floating-point numbers.
HN users discuss integer overflow in C/C++, focusing on its undefined behavior and the security implications. Some highlight the dangers, especially in situations where the compiler optimizes away overflow checks based on the assumption that it can't happen. Others point out that -fwrapv can enforce predictable wrapping behavior, making code safer but potentially slower. The discussion also touches on how static analyzers can help catch these issues, and the inherent difficulties in ensuring complete safety in C/C++ due to the language's flexibility. A few commenters mention alternatives like Rust, which offer stricter memory safety and overflow handling. One commenter shares a personal anecdote about an integer underflow vulnerability they found in a C++ program, emphasizing the real-world impact of these seemingly theoretical problems.
Rust's presence in Hacker News job postings continues its upward trajectory, further solidifying its position as a sought-after language, particularly for backend and systems programming roles. While Python remains the most frequently mentioned language overall, its growth appears to have plateaued. C++ holds steady, maintaining a significant, though smaller, share of the job market compared to Python. The data suggests a continuing shift towards Rust for performance-critical applications, while Python retains its dominance in areas like data science and machine learning, with C++ remaining relevant for established performance-sensitive domains.
HN commenters discuss potential biases in the data, noting that Hacker News job postings may not represent the broader programming job market. Some point out that the prevalence of Rust, C++, and Python could be skewed by the types of companies that post on HN, likely those in specific tech niches. Others suggest the methodology of scraping only titles might misrepresent actual requirements, as job descriptions often list multiple languages. The limited timeframe of the analysis is also mentioned as a potential factor impacting the trends observed. A few commenters express skepticism about Rust's long-term trajectory, while others emphasize the importance of considering domain-specific needs when choosing a language.
After a year of using Go professionally, the author reflects positively on the switch from Java. Go's simplicity, speed, and built-in concurrency features significantly boosted productivity. While missing Java's mature ecosystem and advanced tooling, particularly IntelliJ IDEA, the author found Go's lightweight tools sufficient and appreciated the language's straightforward error handling and fast compilation times. The learning curve was minimal, and the overall experience improved developer satisfaction and project efficiency, making the transition worthwhile.
Many commenters on Hacker News appreciated the author's honest and nuanced comparison of Java and Go. Several highlighted the cultural differences between the ecosystems, noting Java's enterprise focus and Go's emphasis on simplicity. Some questioned the author's assessment of Go's error handling, arguing that it can be verbose, though others defended it as explicit and helpful. Performance benefits of Go were acknowledged but some suggested they might be overstated for typical applications. A few Java developers shared their positive experiences with newer Java features and frameworks, contrasting the author's potentially outdated perspective. Several commenters also mentioned the importance of choosing the right tool for the job, recognizing that neither language is universally superior.
Common Lisp saw continued, albeit slow and steady, progress in 2023-2024. Key developments include improved tooling, notably with the rise of the CLPM build system and continued refinement of Roswell. Libraries like FFI, CFFI, and Bordeaux Threads saw improvements, along with advancements in web development frameworks like CLOG and Woo. The community remains active, albeit small, with ongoing efforts in areas like documentation and learning resources. While no groundbreaking shifts occurred, the ecosystem continues to mature, providing a stable and powerful platform for its dedicated user base.
Several commenters on Hacker News appreciated the overview of Common Lisp's recent developments and the author's personal experience. Some highlighted the value of CL's stability and the ongoing work improving its ecosystem, particularly around areas like web development. Others discussed the language's strengths, such as its powerful macro system and interactive development environment, while acknowledging its steeper learning curve compared to more mainstream options. The continued interest and slow but steady progress of Common Lisp were seen as positive signs. One commenter expressed excitement about upcoming web framework improvements, while others shared their own positive experiences with using CL for specific projects.
The author is developing a Scheme implementation in async Rust to explore the synergy between the two. They believe Rust's robust tooling, performance, and memory safety, combined with its burgeoning async ecosystem, provide an ideal foundation for a modern Lisp dialect. Async capabilities offer exciting potential for concurrent Scheme programming, especially with features like lightweight tasks and channels. The project aims to leverage Rust's strengths while preserving the elegance and flexibility of Scheme, potentially offering a compelling alternative for both Lisp enthusiasts and Rust developers interested in functional programming.
HN commenters generally expressed interest in the project, finding the combination of Scheme and async Rust intriguing. Several questioned the choice of Rust for performance reasons, arguing that garbage collection makes it a poor fit for truly high-performance async workloads, and suggesting alternatives like C, C++, or even Zig. Some suggested exploring other approaches within the Rust ecosystem, like using a different garbage collector or a stack-allocated scheme. Others praised the project's focus on developer experience and the potential of combining Scheme's expressiveness with Rust's safety features. A few commenters also discussed the challenges of integrating garbage collection with async runtimes and the potential trade-offs involved. The author's responses clarified some of the design choices and acknowledged the performance concerns, indicating they're open to exploring different strategies.
"Tiny Pointers" introduces a technique to reduce pointer size in C/C++ programs, thereby lowering memory usage without significantly impacting performance. The core idea involves restricting pointers to smaller regions of memory, enabling them to be represented with fewer bits. The paper details several methods for achieving this, including static analysis, profile-guided optimization, and dynamic recompilation. Experimental results demonstrate memory savings of up to 40% with negligible performance overhead in various benchmarks and real-world applications. This approach offers a promising solution for memory-constrained environments, particularly embedded systems and mobile devices.
HN users discuss the implications of "tiny pointers," focusing on potential performance improvements and drawbacks. Some doubt the practicality due to increased code complexity and the overhead of managing pointer metadata. Concerns are raised about compatibility with existing codebases and the potential for fragmentation in the memory allocator. Others express interest in exploring this concept further, particularly its application in specific scenarios like embedded systems or custom memory allocators where fine-grained control over memory is crucial. There's also discussion on whether the claimed benefits would outweigh the costs in real-world applications, with some suggesting that traditional optimization techniques might be more effective. A few commenters point out similar existing techniques like tagged pointers and debate the novelty of this approach.
Zeroperl leverages WebAssembly (Wasm) to create a secure sandbox for executing Perl code. It compiles a subset of Perl 5 to Wasm, allowing scripts to run in a browser or server environment with restricted capabilities. This approach enhances security by limiting access to the host system's resources, preventing malicious code from wreaking havoc. Zeroperl utilizes a custom runtime environment built on Wasmer, a Wasm runtime, and focuses on supporting commonly used Perl modules for tasks like text processing and bioinformatics. While not aiming for full Perl compatibility, Zeroperl offers a secure and efficient way to execute specific Perl workloads in constrained environments.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed interest in Zeroperl, praising its innovative approach to sandboxing Perl using WebAssembly. Some questioned the performance implications of this method, wondering if it would introduce significant overhead. Others discussed alternative sandboxing techniques, like using containers or VMs, comparing their strengths and weaknesses to WebAssembly. Several users highlighted potential use cases, particularly for serverless functions and other cloud-native environments. A few expressed skepticism about the viability of fully securing Perl code within WebAssembly given Perl's dynamic nature and CPAN module dependencies. One commenter offered a detailed technical explanation of why certain system calls remain accessible despite the sandbox, emphasizing the ongoing challenges inherent in securing dynamic languages.
This video demonstrates the incredibly fast incremental compilation of the Zig self-hosted compiler. By making a small, seemingly insignificant change to a source file within the compiler's codebase and rebuilding, the video showcases a rebuild time of just around 25 milliseconds. This highlights Zig's efficient build system and its focus on fast iteration times, a key advantage for developer productivity.
Hacker News users generally praised the Zig compiler's fast incremental compilation demonstrated in the video. Several commenters highlighted the impressive speed and how it contributes to a positive developer experience. Some pointed out that while the demo is compelling, real-world project builds with dependencies might not be as instantaneous. Others discussed the potential of Zig's self-hosting capability and build system, comparing it favorably to other languages and build tools. A few users also expressed interest in Zig's memory management and safety features. There was some discussion about the practical limitations of incremental compilation and the importance of understanding its inner workings.
K is a concise and powerful array-oriented programming language designed for speed and expressiveness. It prioritizes right-to-left evaluation, uses a small set of built-in symbols for a wide range of operations, and features implicit iteration over arrays. This allows complex data transformations to be expressed with minimal code. K leverages a dictionary-like structure called an associative array as its core data type, facilitating easy handling of key-value pairs. The language is intended for building high-performance applications, particularly in domains like finance where efficient data manipulation is crucial. Its terse syntax and powerful primitives make it ideal for rapid prototyping and concise expression of algorithms.
HN users discuss K's terse syntax, powerful array-oriented programming, and steep learning curve. Some find its conciseness appealing, comparing it favorably to APL and J, while others find it overly cryptic. Several commenters mention its historical influence on other languages and databases like kdb+. Performance is a recurring theme, with users noting K's speed and efficiency. The lack of free, readily available learning resources is also highlighted as a barrier to entry, though some point to the "K Book" mentioned in the submission as a useful starting point. The community appears small but dedicated, with experienced K programmers offering insights and resources to those curious about the language.
Nvidia's security team advocates shifting away from C/C++ due to its susceptibility to memory-related vulnerabilities, which account for a significant portion of their reported security issues. They propose embracing memory-safe languages like Rust, Go, and Java to improve the security posture of their products and reduce the time and resources spent on vulnerability remediation. While acknowledging the performance benefits often associated with C/C++, they argue that modern memory-safe languages offer comparable performance while significantly mitigating security risks. This shift requires overcoming challenges like retraining engineers and integrating new tools, but Nvidia believes the long-term security gains outweigh the transitional costs.
Hacker News commenters largely agree with the AdaCore blog post's premise that C is a major source of vulnerabilities. Many point to Rust as a viable alternative, highlighting its memory safety features and performance. Some discuss the practical challenges of transitioning away from C, citing legacy codebases, tooling, and the existing expertise surrounding C. Others explore alternative approaches like formal verification or stricter coding standards for C. A few commenters push back on the idea of abandoning C entirely, arguing that its performance benefits and low-level control are still necessary for certain applications, and that focusing on better developer training and tools might be a more effective solution. The trade-offs between safety and performance are a recurring theme.
Ohm is a parsing toolkit designed for creating parsers in JavaScript and TypeScript that are both powerful and easy to use. It features a grammar definition syntax closely resembling EBNF, enabling developers to express complex syntax rules clearly and concisely. Ohm's built-in support for semantic actions allows users to directly embed JavaScript or TypeScript code within their grammar rules, simplifying the process of building abstract syntax trees (ASTs) and performing other actions during parsing. The toolkit provides excellent error reporting capabilities, helping developers quickly identify and fix syntax errors. Its flexible architecture makes it suitable for various applications, from validating user input to building full-fledged compilers and interpreters.
HN users generally expressed interest in Ohm, praising its user-friendliness, clear documentation, and the power offered by its grammar-based approach to parsing. Several compared it favorably to traditional parser generators like PEG.js and nearley, highlighting Ohm's superior error messages and easier learning curve. Some users discussed potential applications, including building linters, formatters, and domain-specific languages. A few questioned the performance implications of its JavaScript implementation, while others suggested potential improvements like adding support for left-recursive grammars. The overall sentiment leaned positive, with many eager to try Ohm in their own projects.
Migrating a large, mature Scala 2 codebase (a Play Framework web application) to Scala 3 proved to be a generally smooth experience, with surprisingly few major hurdles. While the compiler was strict and uncovered some pre-existing issues, most migration problems were readily solvable with minor code adjustments. The new features, like enums and opaque types, offered significant improvements in type safety and code clarity. Performance saw a slight improvement, and the migration ultimately simplified the codebase, reducing boilerplate and improving maintainability. The biggest challenge was handling macros, which required waiting for compatible libraries or implementing workarounds. Overall, the author strongly recommends migrating to Scala 3, highlighting the long-term benefits over the manageable short-term effort.
HN users generally praised the blog post for its honesty and detailed account of a real-world Scala 3 migration. Several commenters echoed the author's struggles with the IntelliJ Scala plugin and its impact on the migration process. Some highlighted the benefits of Scala 3's new features, particularly the improved type system and metaprogramming capabilities. Others discussed the challenges of community adoption and the fragmentation caused by libraries not yet supporting Scala 3. A few users questioned the overall value proposition of Scala 3, given the migration effort required. The lack of comprehensive documentation and the steep learning curve for some features were also mentioned as pain points.
OpenLDK is a project that implements a Java Virtual Machine (JVM) and Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler written entirely in Common Lisp. It aims to be a high-performance JVM alternative, leveraging Lisp's metaprogramming capabilities for dynamic code generation and optimization. The project features a modular design, encompassing a bytecode interpreter, a tiered JIT compiler using a method-based compilation strategy, and a garbage collector. OpenLDK is considered experimental and under active development, focusing on performance enhancements and broader Java compatibility.
Commenters on Hacker News express interest in OpenLDK, primarily focusing on its unusual implementation of a Java Virtual Machine (JVM) in Common Lisp. Several question the practical applications and performance implications of this approach, wondering about its speed and suitability for real-world projects. Some highlight the potential benefits of Lisp's dynamic nature for tasks like debugging and introspection. Others draw parallels to similar projects like Clojure and GraalVM, discussing their respective advantages and disadvantages. A few express skepticism about the long-term viability of the project, while others praise the technical achievement and express curiosity about its potential. The novelty of using Lisp for JVM implementation clearly sparks the most discussion.
Bjarne Stroustrup's "21st Century C++" blog post advocates for modernizing C++ usage by focusing on safety and performance. He highlights features introduced since C++11, like ranges, concepts, modules, and coroutines, which enable simpler, safer, and more efficient code. Stroustrup emphasizes using these tools to combat complexity and vulnerabilities while retaining C++'s performance advantages. He encourages developers to embrace modern C++, utilizing static analysis and embracing a simpler, more expressive style guided by the "keep it simple" principle. By moving away from older, less safe practices and leveraging new features, developers can write robust and efficient code fit for the demands of modern software development.
Hacker News users discussed the challenges and benefits of modern C++. Several commenters pointed out the complexities introduced by new features, arguing that while powerful, they contribute to a steeper learning curve and can make code harder to maintain. The benefits of concepts, ranges, and modules were acknowledged, but some expressed skepticism about their widespread adoption and practical impact due to compiler limitations and legacy codebases. Others highlighted the ongoing tension between embracing modern C++ and maintaining compatibility with existing projects. The discussion also touched upon build systems and the difficulty of integrating new C++ features into existing workflows. Some users advocated for simpler, more focused languages like Zig and Jai, suggesting they offer a more manageable approach to systems programming. Overall, the sentiment reflected a cautious optimism towards modern C++, tempered by concerns about complexity and practicality.
This blog post advocates for a "no-panic" approach to Rust systems programming, aiming to eliminate all panics in production code. The author argues that while panic! is useful during development, it's unsuitable for production systems where predictable failure handling is crucial. They propose using the ? operator extensively for error propagation and leveraging types like Result and Option to explicitly handle potential failures. This forces developers to consider and address all possible error scenarios, leading to more robust and reliable systems. The post also touches upon strategies for handling truly unrecoverable errors, suggesting techniques like logging the error and then halting the system gracefully, rather than relying on the unpredictable behavior of a panic.
HN commenters largely agree with the author's premise that the no_panic crate offers a useful approach for systems programming in Rust. Several highlight the benefit of forcing explicit error handling at compile time, preventing unexpected panics in production. Some discuss the trade-offs of increased verbosity and potential performance overhead compared to using Option or Result. One commenter points out a potential issue with using no_panic in interrupt handlers where unwinding is genuinely unsafe, suggesting careful consideration is needed when applying this technique. Another appreciates the blog post's clarity and the practical example provided. There's also a brief discussion on how the underlying mechanisms of no_panic work, including its use of static mutable variables and compiler intrinsics.
The author details their process of creating a WebAssembly (Wasm) virtual machine (VM) written entirely in C. Driven by a desire for a lightweight, embeddable Wasm runtime for resource-constrained environments, they built the VM from scratch, implementing core features like the stack-based execution model, linear memory, and basic WebAssembly System Interface (WASI) support. The project focused on simplicity and understandability over performance, serving primarily as a learning exercise and a platform for experimentation with Wasm. The post walks through key aspects of the VM's design and implementation, including parsing the Wasm binary format, handling function calls, and managing memory. It also highlights the challenges faced and lessons learned during the development process.
Hacker News users generally praised the author's clear writing style and the educational value of the post. Several commenters discussed the project's performance, noting that it's not optimized for speed and suggesting potential improvements like just-in-time compilation. Some shared their own experiences with WASM interpreters and related projects, including comparisons to other implementations and alternative approaches like using a stack machine. Others appreciated the detailed explanation of the parsing and execution process, finding it helpful for understanding WASM internals. A few users pointed out minor corrections or areas for potential enhancement in the code, demonstrating active engagement with the technical details.
The blog post details methods for eliminating left and mutual recursion in context-free grammars, crucial for parser construction. Left recursion, where a non-terminal derives itself as the leftmost symbol, is problematic for top-down parsers. The post demonstrates how to remove direct left recursion using factorization and substitution. It then explains how to handle indirect left recursion by ordering non-terminals and systematically applying the direct recursion removal technique. Finally, it addresses mutual recursion, where two or more non-terminals derive each other, converting it into direct left recursion, which can then be eliminated using the previously described methods. The post uses concrete examples to illustrate these transformations, making it easier to understand the process of converting a grammar into a parser-friendly form.
Hacker News users discussed the potential inefficiency of the presented left-recursion elimination algorithm, particularly its reliance on repeated string concatenation. They suggested alternative approaches using stacks or accumulating results in a list for better performance. Some commenters questioned the necessity of fully eliminating left recursion in all cases, pointing out that modern parsing techniques, like packrat parsing, can handle left-recursive grammars directly. The lack of formal proofs or performance comparisons with established methods was also noted. A few users discussed the benefits and drawbacks of different parsing libraries and techniques, including ANTLR and various parser combinator libraries.
plrust is a PostgreSQL extension that allows developers to write stored procedures and functions in Rust. It leverages the PostgreSQL procedural language handler framework and offers safe, performant execution within the database. By compiling Rust code into shared libraries, plrust provides direct access to PostgreSQL internals and avoids the overhead of external processes or interpreters. This allows developers to harness Rust's speed and safety for complex database tasks while integrating seamlessly with existing PostgreSQL infrastructure.
HN users discuss the complexities and potential benefits of writing PostgreSQL extensions in Rust. Several express interest in the project (plrust), citing Rust's performance advantages and memory safety as key motivators for moving away from C. Concerns are raised about the overhead of crossing the FFI boundary between Rust and PostgreSQL, and the potential difficulties in debugging. Some commenters suggest comparing plrust's performance to existing solutions like PL/pgSQL and C extensions, while others highlight the potential for improved developer experience and safety that Rust offers. The maintainability of generated Rust code from PostgreSQL queries is also questioned. Overall, the comments reflect cautious optimism about plrust's potential, tempered by a pragmatic awareness of the challenges involved in integrating Rust into the PostgreSQL ecosystem.
Astral is a new static type checker being developed for Python that aims to be faster and more ergonomic than existing options like MyPy. It leverages a new type inference algorithm designed for performance and boasts features like auto-completion, goto-definition, and an improved developer experience. The project is still early in development but claims significant speed improvements, with a goal of being at least 5x faster than MyPy on real-world codebases. Astral also intends to offer seamless integration with existing Python tooling and provide enhanced support for popular libraries like NumPy and Pandas.
Hacker News users discuss Astral's potential, drawing parallels to MyPy but with a focus on performance. Some express skepticism about static typing in Python, questioning its necessity and impact on the language's flexibility. Others are interested in Astral's approach to gradual typing and its ability to handle complex codebases. Performance improvements over MyPy are frequently mentioned as a key benefit. Several commenters inquire about specific features, such as handling metaclasses and integration with existing tools. Overall, there's a mix of cautious optimism and interest in seeing how Astral develops.
Preserves is a new data language designed for clarity and expressiveness, aiming to bridge the gap between simple configuration formats like JSON/YAML and full-fledged programming languages. It focuses on data transformation and manipulation with a concise syntax inspired by functional programming. Key features include immutability, a type system emphasizing structural types, built-in support for common data structures like maps and lists, and user-defined functions for more complex logic. The project aims to offer a powerful yet approachable tool for tasks ranging from simple configuration to data processing and analysis, especially where maintainability and readability are paramount.
Hacker News users discussed Preserves' potential, comparing it to tools like JSON, YAML, TOML, and edn. Some lauded its expressiveness, particularly its support for comments and arbitrary keys. Others questioned its practical value beyond configuration files, wondering about performance, tooling, and whether its added complexity justified the benefits over simpler formats. The lack of a formal specification was also a concern. Several commenters expressed interest in seeing real-world use cases and benchmarks to better assess Preserves' viability. Some saw potential for niche applications like game modding or creative coding, while others remained skeptical about its broad adoption. The discussion highlighted the trade-off between expressiveness and simplicity in data languages.
Go 1.24's revamped go tool significantly streamlines dependency management and build processes. By embedding version information directly within the go.mod file and leveraging a content-addressable file system (CAS), builds become more reproducible and efficient. This eliminates the need for separate go.sum files and simplifies workflows, especially in environments with limited network access. The improved tooling allows developers to more easily vendor dependencies, create reproducible builds across different machines, and share builds efficiently, making it a major improvement for the Go ecosystem.
HN users largely agree that the go tool improvements in 1.24 are significant and welcome. Several commenters highlight the improved dependency management as a major win, specifically the reduced verbosity and simplified workflow when adding, updating, or vending dependencies. Some express appreciation for the enhanced transparency, allowing developers to more easily understand the tool's actions. A few users note that the improvements bring Go's tooling closer to the experience offered by other languages like Rust's Cargo. There's also discussion around the specific benefits of lazy loading, minimal version selection (MVS), and the implications for package management within monorepos. While largely positive, some users mention lingering minor frustrations or express curiosity about further planned improvements.
Summary of Comments ( 9 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43186614
Hacker News users generally agree with Google's push for memory safety, citing the prevalence of memory-related vulnerabilities. Several commenters highlight Rust as a strong contender for a safer systems language, praising its performance and security features. Some discuss the challenges of adoption, including the learning curve for Rust and the existing codebase in C/C++. The idea of gradual adoption and tooling to help transition are also mentioned. One commenter notes the importance of standardizing error handling and propagation to complement memory safety. Another emphasizes the need for auditing tools and automated detection capabilities. A few users are more skeptical, suggesting that the focus on memory safety might divert attention from other important security aspects.
The Hacker News post "Securing tomorrow's software: the need for memory safety standards" (linking to a Google Security Blog post) generated a moderate discussion with several interesting comments. A recurring theme revolves around the tension between security and performance.
One commenter points out the long history of attempts to address memory safety issues, referencing CHERI and Midori, and expressing skepticism about widespread adoption due to the potential performance costs. They suggest that while memory safety is crucial, the industry often prioritizes performance. This commenter also raises the issue of backwards compatibility, highlighting the challenge of integrating these changes into existing ecosystems.
Another commenter focuses on the trade-offs between different memory-safe languages, mentioning Rust's strong memory safety guarantees but acknowledging its steeper learning curve. They contrast this with languages like Go and Swift, suggesting they offer a balance between safety and ease of use, though perhaps with slightly weaker safety properties.
The discussion also touches upon the complexities of enforcing memory safety in existing C/C++ codebases. One commenter mentions the difficulty of retrofitting memory safety features, suggesting that comprehensive rewriting or the use of specialized tools and analysis techniques might be necessary.
Several commenters express support for the broader initiative of prioritizing memory safety, acknowledging its importance in reducing vulnerabilities. However, there's a pragmatic understanding that widespread adoption faces significant hurdles, particularly in performance-sensitive environments.
One commenter raises the issue of hardware support for memory safety, arguing that true progress requires advancements at the hardware level to minimize performance overhead. They suggest that software-only solutions are ultimately limited in their effectiveness.
Finally, a few commenters express cautious optimism about the future, noting the increasing industry focus on memory safety. They suggest that the growing awareness of the problem, coupled with the development of new tools and technologies, could eventually lead to significant improvements in software security.