Summary
Create a comprehensive feature parity matrix documenting which C++ features are available in each Rust port, their implementation status, and API differences.
Parent Issue
Part of: [EPIC] docs: Address documentation gaps across all ecosystem systems (#325)
Background (Why)
The kcenon ecosystem has parallel Rust implementations for several systems:
rust_thread_system — Thread pool and job scheduling
rust_logger_system — Logging (23 .rs files)
rust_monitoring_system — Monitoring and metrics
rust_database_system — Database access (SQLite only)
rust_network_system — Networking
rust_container_system — Container types
rust_integrated_thread_system — Integrated thread system
Users choosing between C++ and Rust versions need to know which features are available, missing, or different. No such comparison exists.
Scope (What)
Create docs/RUST_PARITY.md covering:
1. Overall Parity Status
| System |
C++ Features |
Rust Features |
Parity |
Status |
| thread_system |
~130 headers |
? |
?% |
In Progress |
| logger_system |
93 headers |
23 .rs files |
?% |
In Progress |
| monitoring_system |
N/A (C++) |
15 .rs files |
N/A |
Rust-only |
| database_system |
150+ files |
13 files |
?% |
SQLite only |
| network_system |
120+ headers |
? |
?% |
In Progress |
| container_system |
40+ files |
? |
?% |
In Progress |
2. Per-System Feature Comparison
For each system, create a detailed table:
#### thread_system
| Feature | C++ | Rust | Notes |
|---------|-----|------|-------|
| Basic thread pool | ✅ | ✅ | API differs |
| Policy queues | ✅ | ❌ | Not ported |
| NUMA support | ✅ | ❌ | Not ported |
| Autoscaler | ✅ | ✅ | Simplified |
| DAG scheduler | ✅ | ❌ | Not ported |
| Diagnostics | ✅ | ❌ | Not ported |
3. API Mapping Guide
- Naming convention differences (C++ snake_case vs Rust snake_case)
- Type mapping (std::string ↔ String, Result ↔ Result<T, E>)
- Error handling differences (C++ Result vs Rust std::result::Result)
- Memory management (C++ RAII vs Rust ownership)
4. Interop Considerations
- FFI boundaries (if any)
- Data format compatibility
- Protocol compatibility for network communication
- Shared configuration format
5. Roadmap
- Planned Rust features per system
- Priority of feature ports
- Timeline estimates (if available)
Acceptance Criteria
Summary
Create a comprehensive feature parity matrix documenting which C++ features are available in each Rust port, their implementation status, and API differences.
Parent Issue
Part of: [EPIC] docs: Address documentation gaps across all ecosystem systems (#325)
Background (Why)
The kcenon ecosystem has parallel Rust implementations for several systems:
rust_thread_system— Thread pool and job schedulingrust_logger_system— Logging (23 .rs files)rust_monitoring_system— Monitoring and metricsrust_database_system— Database access (SQLite only)rust_network_system— Networkingrust_container_system— Container typesrust_integrated_thread_system— Integrated thread systemUsers choosing between C++ and Rust versions need to know which features are available, missing, or different. No such comparison exists.
Scope (What)
Create
docs/RUST_PARITY.mdcovering:1. Overall Parity Status
2. Per-System Feature Comparison
For each system, create a detailed table:
3. API Mapping Guide
4. Interop Considerations
5. Roadmap
Acceptance Criteria