4 ms·

I have no fists in this fight, but wanted some clarification. Are you saying the reason Rust is now being integrated into the Kernel instead of Golang is becau

I have no fists in this fight, but wanted some clarification. Are you saying the reason Rust is now being integrated into the Kernel instead of Golang is because of the success of evangelists, not because of the merit of the language itself? I'm not involved in Kernel development myself, but if I was, I'd see your statement as a big hit in the face that we don't know what we're doing, if they (Kernel developers) are being sold to use Rust because of marketing, not because of the value of the language.

0des 5y ago
Its not existing kernel devs that suddenly switched to rust. It is the incoming cohort.
- capableweb 5y ago
  For someone to start using a new language in the Kernel, some of the existing "guard" has to approve it, meaning they've investigated if it's fit or not. Or can anyone willy-nilly contribute to the Kernel without anyone approving changes going into the main branch?
  - 0des 5y ago
    The existing guard doesnt have to prove anything, theyre on the way out. C is a tough language and not a lot of people have the patience for it, and even less people are being forced to learn it like the rest of us in school. As this segment of the community ages out, we arent going to see more code written in C, so we have the new group with Rust, recreating all of the same issues in effigy of C, but with better string handling. It's not like it is terrible code, but as Nikola Tesla used to say "it is what it is, and it aint what it aint". You see how parties completely unrelated to the fight got Linus ousted? That was not based on technical merit, it was due to the changing tide regarding outcomes when people are offended/mistreated. Rust has significant overlap with the community that gave way to this, don't think it is 100% open arms and welcomes, because that is not the case. Every day we stray further from God.
    - Alekhine 5y ago
      Damn right I don't have the patience for C. Writing anything in C properly takes a long time, and even then bugs are usually found after. Compare and contrast Rust, where the code I write will usually just work. I don't need to be extra careful with it because the compiler is strict. You can say that this is indicative of some flaw in my character or whatever, but, uh, I don't care.
  - mplanchard 5y ago
    Miguel Ojeda is doing the lion’s share of the work here, and he is a kernel maintainer: https://ojeda.dev/ https://ojeda.dev/ The person you’re replying to is either deeply misinformed or trolling
- mplanchard 5y ago
  The main push for and patches to include rust in linux have come from an established and longtime kernel contributor. What you’re saying is categorically false.
- staticassertion 5y ago
  Cool, so everyone can just ignore you then, since this is entirely incorrect.
jlokier 5y ago
I must admit, I am still surprised to see Rust gaining acceptance when the reasons Linus gave in 2010 for rejecting C++ in the kernel appear to apply to Rust equally well. I can't think of any of the pragmatic points which he raised which doesn't apply to Rust. For example, the arguments against namespaces and function overloading, high context dependency, easy of understanding and in favour of C's simplicity in general. My guess (it's just a guess) is that his position has shifted over time to consider a higher-abstraction, higher-complexity language, as development methods and the complexity and professionalising of the kernel have changed since then.

0des 5y ago

Its not existing kernel devs that suddenly switched to rust. It is the incoming cohort.

capableweb 5y ago
For someone to start using a new language in the Kernel, some of the existing "guard" has to approve it, meaning they've investigated if it's fit or not. Or can anyone willy-nilly contribute to the Kernel without anyone approving changes going into the main branch?
- 0des 5y ago
  The existing guard doesnt have to prove anything, theyre on the way out. C is a tough language and not a lot of people have the patience for it, and even less people are being forced to learn it like the rest of us in school. As this segment of the community ages out, we arent going to see more code written in C, so we have the new group with Rust, recreating all of the same issues in effigy of C, but with better string handling. It's not like it is terrible code, but as Nikola Tesla used to say "it is what it is, and it aint what it aint". You see how parties completely unrelated to the fight got Linus ousted? That was not based on technical merit, it was due to the changing tide regarding outcomes when people are offended/mistreated. Rust has significant overlap with the community that gave way to this, don't think it is 100% open arms and welcomes, because that is not the case. Every day we stray further from God.
  - Alekhine 5y ago
    Damn right I don't have the patience for C. Writing anything in C properly takes a long time, and even then bugs are usually found after. Compare and contrast Rust, where the code I write will usually just work. I don't need to be extra careful with it because the compiler is strict. You can say that this is indicative of some flaw in my character or whatever, but, uh, I don't care.
- mplanchard 5y ago
  Miguel Ojeda is doing the lion’s share of the work here, and he is a kernel maintainer: https://ojeda.dev/ https://ojeda.dev/ The person you’re replying to is either deeply misinformed or trolling
mplanchard 5y ago
The main push for and patches to include rust in linux have come from an established and longtime kernel contributor. What you’re saying is categorically false.
staticassertion 5y ago
Cool, so everyone can just ignore you then, since this is entirely incorrect.

jlokier 5y ago

I must admit, I am still surprised to see Rust gaining acceptance when the reasons Linus gave in 2010 for rejecting C++ in the kernel appear to apply to Rust equally well. I can't think of any of the pragmatic points which he raised which doesn't apply to Rust. For example, the arguments against namespaces and function overloading, high context dependency, easy of understanding and in favour of C's simplicity in general. My guess (it's just a guess) is that his position has shifted over time to consider a higher-abstraction, higher-complexity language, as development methods and the complexity and professionalising of the kernel have changed since then.