[zeromq-dev] zeromq, rewritten in Rust

Pieter Hintjens ph at imatix.com
Wed Jun 11 09:59:32 CEST 2014

Hi Fantix,

Nice stuff. If you want to move this into the ZeroMQ community
organization, see http://zeromq.org/docs:organization


On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Fantix King <fantix.king at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it might be easier to have discussions if there is actual code -
> I've started a project "zmq.rs" with some very basic scratches:
> https://github.com/decentfox/zmq.rs
> The code now is meant to be discussed and heavily changed incrementally,
> hopefully with tests carefully covered. Please feel free to drop by and
> comment if you are interested, it is truly appreciated.
> BR,
> Fantix
> --
> http://about.me/fantix
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Fantix King <fantix.king at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sounds really exciting! Please share the project link when there is one if
>> possible.
>> BR,
>> Fantix
>> --
>> http://about.me/fantix
>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Charles Remes <lists at chuckremes.com>
>> wrote:
>>> There was a little twitter chat over the weekend regarding an attempt at
>>> writing a ground-up zeromq library using the new systems language Rust. If
>>> you haven’t heard of Rust, it is a new language under development by the
>>> good folks at Mozilla. It’s original designer has said that he has learned
>>> quite a few things from implementing dozens of languages over the years that
>>> he felt he could solve some new problems and create a cleaner language. Rust
>>> is his attempt at such a feat.
>>> It supposedly solves the problem by borrowing the best from many popular
>>> languages.
>>>         * OOP of C++ without the large, unwieldy syntax
>>>         * performance of C while providing good namespacing, OOP, safe
>>> memory (i.e. no dangling pointers)
>>>         * the functional expressiveness of Haskell but not at the expense
>>> of imperative forms
>>>         * the massive concurrency of Erlang but with a better syntax and
>>> a more flexible memory model (borrowed pointers, immutable defaults, etc)
>>> I recently did a small test project to learn the syntax. The language is
>>> still evolving, so it’s a bit of a moving target. It’s at release 0.9 with a
>>> 1.0 slated for later this year, but they’ve already slipped on delivering a
>>> 1.0 for at least a year so I assume it will slip again.
>>> Anyway, I’d like to volunteer to try and spike a simple example to get
>>> things started. However, I’d like to start a thread here to discuss “lessons
>>> learned” from the existing codebase. We already have a great write-up from
>>> Martin Sustrik (primary author of earlier versions of zeromq) here:
>>> http://250bpm.com/blog:4
>>> http://250bpm.com/blog:8
>>> I’m hoping that others who have read through the source have additional
>>> insights that they’d like to share. For instance, I have seen comments that
>>> zeromq might have more consistent performance it it was wrapped around a
>>> Disruptor (google for that pattern if it’s new to you). People also seem to
>>> really dislike the concept of the context (nanomsg has already eliminated
>>> this… it still exists but is hidden by the library).
>>> Any other insights?
>>> cr
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>>> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
>>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev

More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list