3 ms·
> Rust has the very strong pro of already existing But not in the Linux kernel. Any new effort will be greenfield, why spend the last two years and many more r
by rc00 2y ago
> Rust has the very strong pro of already existing
But not in the Linux kernel. Any new effort will be greenfield, why spend the last two years and many more rallying around an entirely different programming language instead of writing a novel tool?
> Greg in particular has recognized how Rust’s type system will be helpful for preventing other kinds of bugs
Do you have any examples here?
- steveklabnik 2y ago> But not in the Linux kernel. Sure, it is still an experiment, but that's irrelevant: your theoretical "make C memory safe" tooling does not exist and does not exist in the kernel. > instead of writing a novel tool? Do you have a proposed design for the novel tool? Many have tried, nobody has succeeded. > Do you have any examples here? From the article: > Kroah-Hartman said that it could eliminate entire classes of bugs in the kernel. He's said similar things elsewhere: https://social.kernel.org/notice/AlxbVeMxyJNsLoNa6q https://social.kernel.org/notice/AlxbVeMxyJNsLoNa6q