Rust bindings? about foundationdb HOT 7 CLOSED

+1
edit: it is easy to get an idea of the C API from the Python bindings. Particularly here.
edit2: found this repository via crates.io: https://github.com/bluejekyll/foundationdb-rs

from foundationdb.

I also started working on bindings here: https://github.com/encabulators/foundationdb and am eager to get a Rust client library for this going.

from foundationdb.

Hi @waywardmonkeys, Rust bindings sounds like a great idea! I'm stoked to see that you and others have been actively exploring this possibility.

Based upon discussions that I've seen within other oss projects, I'd recommend that we build some community consensus around answering two questions: 1) what is the core FoundationDB project's interest in hosting additional language bindings in-tree vs keeping them out of tree, and 2) more broadly, what's the shared community plan forward for rust bindings.

Hope it's OK, but for now I'd like to migrate this discussion to the community forums to encourage broader participation. You can sign-up using your GitHub login, and you'll see that we just moved a similar discussion re: Swift bindings to the forums as well. #204

Our goal, as we tried to outline in our contributors guide, is to keep GitHub issues mostly focused on tasks -- whereas the forums are the ideal place for discussions, questions, feature requests, and more. Once we figure out the path forward via discussion, we should definitely re-open this issue or others.

from foundationdb.

Hey, hitting this issue today & very curious.

There was discussion about a rust client api library, which may be a canonical link we can forward to people from here. but i'm not sure how similar/dissimilar a "client" is from a "binding"?

Please pardon me @davelester: I'd humbly like to request the status of this issue be re-assessed:

1. we now keep bindings in tree,
2. other bindings have issues for them, albeit more directly actionable issues rather than being a big 0->1 ask.
3. it's much easier to keep tabs on a specific issue in github than it is for interested parties to monitor a project's unique forums & review all posting activity,

Can we re-open this issue? Or is it now closeable as fixed? I feel like real success would be when /bindings/rust has something. I'd love to have a github issue to track that with, to keep on my radar, but if you feel like this still belongs on the forum thats 👍 too.

from foundationdb.

Hey, hitting this issue today & very curious.

There was discussion about a rust client api library, which may be a canonical link we can forward to people from here. but i'm not sure how similar/dissimilar a "client" is from a "binding"?

Please pardon me @davelester: I'd humbly like to request the status of this issue be re-assessed:

1. we now keep bindings in tree,
2. other bindings have issues for them, albeit more directly actionable issues rather than being a big 0->1 ask.
3. it's much easier to keep tabs on a specific issue in github than it is for interested parties to monitor a project's unique forums & review all posting activity,

Can we re-open this issue? Or is it now closeable as fixed? I feel like real success would be when /bindings/rust has something. I'd love to have a github issue to track that with, to keep on my radar, but if you feel like this still belongs on the forum thats 👍 too.

Hi, would you mind opening a new issue and link it with this issue?
This makes sure your issue will be discussed on weekly community meeting at 10am Wed. PST.

from foundationdb.

The current de facto Rust binding might be https://github.com/foundationdb-rs/foundationdb-rs.

But it requires a preinstalled fdb client which I'm unsure if we can avoid with an upstream simultaneously release.

from foundationdb.

The current de facto Rust binding might be https://github.com/foundationdb-rs/foundationdb-rs.

Yes indeed, the community-maintained binding is located at https://github.com/foundationdb-rs/foundationdb-rs. It is not as good as the java bindings, but we (CleverCloud) are using it in production and maintaining it.

But it requires a preinstalled fdb client which I'm unsure if we can avoid with an upstream simultaneously release.

AFAIK, all bindings are only wrappers on top of the actual fdb clients lib, so you will experience the same problem with the other bindings.

from foundationdb.