3 ms·
Unpopular opinion, both MS and Linux should use Ada instead of Rust in the kernel. The rust language isn't stable enough and it does not force the programmer to
by _8j50 3y ago
Unpopular opinion, both MS and Linux should use Ada instead of Rust in the kernel. The rust language isn't stable enough and it does not force the programmer to do uncomfortable things to avoid logic errors (not memory or race condition). Ada had been tested for decades in life or death level critical systems and it is the better direction for the future.
- worthless-trash 3y agoI looked into Ada, have you written any ? If I remember correctly, there is a safe dialect of Ada but it was difficult to setup on Linux. Is that still the case ?
- _8j50 3y agoI played with very little introductory programs only. SPARK is the formally verifiable subset of ada from what I recall but my suggestion was to use the ada (ada95?) supported by gcc which means there is no special setup needed other than configure gcc. Ada kernel modules have be written but I don't know if any were mainlined.
- sgt 3y agoYeah but.. Ada is boring, isn't it? I'd like to hear some opinions on that. But in any case, Rust is exciting and new, and therefore it's being adopted. Who wants to be spending their spare time on boring tech? Risk higher, but more fun.
- tjalfi 3y agoThe Spark Ada safety critical subset is memory safe, but Ada isn't. It's possible to write a kernel in Spark, but hard to believe that you'd get buy-in from other kernel developers. Ada doesn't eliminate use after free, race conditions, or dereferencing null pointers[0]. Rust addresses these, so it's hard to see Ada as an improvement. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/ada/comments/mme3jk/is_ada_memory_safe/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ada/comments/mme3jk/is_ada_memory_s...