3 ms·

This reads like a comment from twenty years ago, to be honest. Memory safety could've been addressed through kernel tools and frameworks for decades, but it ha

This reads like a comment from twenty years ago, to be honest. Memory safety could've been addressed through kernel tools and frameworks for decades, but it hasn't. And it _should_ be part of the language, as even low level languages like C try not to clobber memory and specify undefined behaviour in cases where you may accidentally end up doing it anyway. There are good arguments for and against other Rust features such as the way panic!() works and the strictness of the borrow checker. However, "C and tooling can do everything your fancy pants new language does" has been said for longer than I've been alive and yet every month I see CVE reports about major projects caused by bugs that would never have passed the Rust compiler. Out of every reason I can think of, a lack of hardware support seems like the least likely reason for a hardware manufacturer not to upstream hardware support. Look at companies like Qualcom, with massive ranges of devices and working kernel drivers, hacked together because upstreaming doesn't benefit them. Look at companies like Apple, who doesn't care if their software works on Linux or not. The Linux kernel supports everything from 90s supercomputers to drones to smart toothbrushes, there's no lack of hardware support.

b20000 3y ago
remember java? they forced OO onto users. a huge mistake. developers should not be forced to use a paradigm. same with memory safety. if they don’t get it, find better developers and pay more. essentially you are saying rust is great because companies can hire clueless people and rust will compensate for their inability. it’s clear from your comment you never built a device yourself running linux on an obscure SoC dealing with patches that were never accepted.
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  Java has been proven to work fine. I wouldn't use it for programming an OS, but it's absolutely massive for web development and other backend stuff. Applying patches to the Linux kernel isn't that hard? Porting abandoned code sucks, but putting in the work to finish and include the patches would just move that annoying work to the rest of the kernel instead of a few people working on weird SoCs. > essentially you are saying rust is great because companies can hire clueless people and rust will compensate for their inability That's not what I'm saying, at all. What I'm saying is that nobody is perfect, not even C developers. Even if the mythical perfect C developer, who writes bugless code, does all the necessary sanitization, and always applies the necessary layers of tooling even when personally inconvenient, does exist, they can make better use of their time by using a language toolset that doesn't necessitate that extra work in the first place, regardless of whether that's Rust, C++, Zig, Frama-C, Carbon or Jakt. The "everybody who makes mistakes is clueless" crowd is exactly why C developers get such a bad rep. C compilers have a billion warnings and -Weverything -Wnoimeaneverything -Wnoeverysinglething exactly because C developers, like any other developers, need help.

b20000 3y ago

remember java? they forced OO onto users. a huge mistake. developers should not be forced to use a paradigm. same with memory safety. if they don’t get it, find better developers and pay more. essentially you are saying rust is great because companies can hire clueless people and rust will compensate for their inability. it’s clear from your comment you never built a device yourself running linux on an obscure SoC dealing with patches that were never accepted.

jeroenhd 3y ago
Java has been proven to work fine. I wouldn't use it for programming an OS, but it's absolutely massive for web development and other backend stuff. Applying patches to the Linux kernel isn't that hard? Porting abandoned code sucks, but putting in the work to finish and include the patches would just move that annoying work to the rest of the kernel instead of a few people working on weird SoCs. > essentially you are saying rust is great because companies can hire clueless people and rust will compensate for their inability That's not what I'm saying, at all. What I'm saying is that nobody is perfect, not even C developers. Even if the mythical perfect C developer, who writes bugless code, does all the necessary sanitization, and always applies the necessary layers of tooling even when personally inconvenient, does exist, they can make better use of their time by using a language toolset that doesn't necessitate that extra work in the first place, regardless of whether that's Rust, C++, Zig, Frama-C, Carbon or Jakt. The "everybody who makes mistakes is clueless" crowd is exactly why C developers get such a bad rep. C compilers have a billion warnings and -Weverything -Wnoimeaneverything -Wnoeverysinglething exactly because C developers, like any other developers, need help.