3 ms·
There’s some merit to “replacing battle tested code with new code”, but (1) a straight port can significantly mitigate these risks and (2) the parent explicitly
by throwaway894345 4y ago
There’s some merit to “replacing battle tested code with new code”, but (1) a straight port can significantly mitigate these risks and (2) the parent explicitly compared “poorly-written Rust” with “expertly-written C”, so I think your steelman is far too charitable (I’m all for charitable interpretation but the charitable interpretation must bear some semblance to the original).
- hn_go_brrrrr 4y agoI agree with you on all counts. I think the only thing I can say wrt poorly/expertly written is I haven't met very many people capable of writing top-quality Rust (most are "I've used it for a side project or two"), whereas my professional network is filled with C experts. I expect this is due to the types of jobs I work, but the point stands: if we were to try to replace C with Rust we would likely get at most "journeyman" quality.
- throwaway894345 4y agoEven if the average C developer is more expert than the average Rust developer, I don't think the kernel will be developed by an average developer of either language.