3 ms·
TBH that's a level of quality control that probably informs the Linux kernel dev's view of Rust reliability - it's a consideration when evaluating the risk of i
by generalizations 2y ago
TBH that's a level of quality control that probably informs the Linux kernel dev's view of Rust reliability - it's a consideration when evaluating the risk of including that language.
- Avamander 2y agoAre you sure you want to start comparing the quality control of C and Rust packaging or reliability?
- generalizations 2y agoI trust the quality control of the Linux kernel devs a lot more than the semantics of a language.
- whoknowsidont 2y agoYour comment misunderstands the entire point and risk assessment of what's being talked about. It's about the overall stability and "contract" of the tooling/platform, not what the tooling can control under it. A great example was already given: It took clang 10 years to be "accepted." It has nothing to do with the language or its overall characteristics, it's about stability.
- dralley 2y agoKernel devs more than almost everyone else are well aware that even the existing C toolchains are imperfect.