Writing an OS in Rust: Catching CPU Exceptions
Haven't been following this blog, but one thing caught my eye while skimming the post:>The implementations of these methods need to modify the correct bits of the u16 without touching the other bits. For example, we would need the following bit-fiddling to set the stack index:    self.0 = (self.0 & 0xfff8) | stack_index;

>Or alternatively:    self.0 = (self.0 & (!0b111)) | stack_index;

>Or:    self.0 = ((self.0 >> 3) << 3) | stack_index;

>Well, none of these variants is really readable and it’s very easy to make mistakes somewhere. Therefore I created a BitField type with the following API:    self.0.set_range(0..3, stack_index);

>I think it is much more readable, since we abstracted away all bit-masking details.Personally, I disagree. Whilst it is easy to make mistakes when writing bit-fiddling code (there seems to be one in the second example, unless Rust has on of the more weird !-operators in programming languages), or any code for that matter, the meaning of all the bitwise operations is easy to recognise.Without knowing the API, the transformed line rings no bells. How many APIs do you want to learn?