3 ms·
Java does not have memory safety issues. But it's not appealing, apparently. So why Rust then?
by zx8080 1y ago
Java does not have memory safety issues. But it's not appealing, apparently.
So why Rust then?
- nullpoint420 1y agoJava is not a systems level programming language (at least in its modern OpenJDK form)
- rjsw 1y agoSun tried out allowing Java in the kernel, it could be used to write device drivers just as Rust is being used now.
- anextio 1y agoYou can hammer an applications programming language to do systems things, but it will never be a good experience nor have optimal performance.
- WD-42 1y agoHow would that even work with the JVM?
- zx8080 1y agoProbably https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazelle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazelle or similar would be the answer.
- nolist_policy 1y agoCould you write interrupt handlers in it? You can't even do synchronous signal handling in Java.
- rjsw 1y agoThis [1] was the paper on it. [1] https://labs.oracle.com/pls/apex/f?p=LABS:0:3891254133275:APPLICATION_PROCESS=GETDOC_INLINE:::DOC_ID:142 https://labs.oracle.com/pls/apex/f?p=LABS:0:3891254133275:AP...
- joha4270 1y agoMemory safe languages such as Java have already taken the world by storm, decades ago. The interesting combination rust brings is a memory safe language that can compete with C and C++ for the speed crown.