4 ms·

So many tentative posts here :) I say, "Go for it!" Kozlowski's attitude is exactly what we need. That's not saying it will ship in Ubuntu 18.04... It will

So many tentative posts here :) I say, "Go for it!" Kozlowski's attitude is exactly what we need. That's not saying it will ship in Ubuntu 18.04... It will be carefully vetted just like any piece of software, but it's got to start somewhere and I like that he's sharing his thought process with the community. As people have pointed out, it may not actually be the Rust part of it that's valuable, but the organization and code quality. Rah rah!

oconnor663 11y ago
I'm not so sure about the attitude. > After reading about the newest glibc vulnerability, I have decided to see how much effort there is in rewriting parts of glibc in a safe language. If I were a C programmer, especially if I were a C programmer who worked on glibc, I might feel a little bit insulted that remark. Safety is a complicated concept, and calling Rust "safe" and C "unsafe" oversimplifies things, especially if your Rust code includes unsafe blocks. See also http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-in-rust http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/heartbleed-in-rust. I don't think we have anything to lose by being as diplomatic as possible with these sorts of things. We can acknowledge that Rust's safety is a work in progress, and that we're still learning about the drawbacks.
- betenoire 11y ago
  it might oversimplify it, but there is truth in there too