3 ms·

This is why I think it's so crucial to move Rust into the Linux kernel. It's not about new-school-cool vs old heads. It's not about getting off someone's lawn,

This is why I think it's so crucial to move Rust into the Linux kernel. It's not about new-school-cool vs old heads. It's not about getting off someone's lawn, it's about solving a really basic but important problem. Sure we can just get not into accidents and be rid of seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, and ABS, but it's not a real world. Any solution that just adds to C, will make it a new C, that will take years to prove itself and still require relearning and push-back. I'd love a real world suggestion that does it better. The best I can imagine is annotations on C that are checkable formal methods... but that just sounds like reinventing the borrow-checker.

RKearney 2y ago
I'd just be happy if organizations stopped doing business with software vendors that still mandate disabling DEP, ASLR, and the dreaded "Please disable your antivirus before installing".
astrange 2y ago
You'd be able to code memory bugs into an OS kernel written in Rust. It's the same problem as a JavaScript JIT - the fundamental operations it has to do are unsafe, so it doesn't matter what language it's in. Among other things, you need more secure hardware to make progress.
- yencabulator 2y ago
  Able to, sure. As probable? Definitely not. Practically all kernel exploits are accidents in buffer handling. (Getting machine-readable syscall descriptions that describe the rules for pointers to buffers and their lengths in ways that can get safe code generated from them would be a huge win, on top of "just use Rust".)