5 ms·

> rusties don't want to succumb and use a standard tar library because of performance (self inflicted performance hit from creating an incompatible ecosystem) o

by Ygg2 1y ago

> rusties don't want to succumb and use a standard tar library because of performance (self inflicted performance hit from creating an incompatible ecosystem) or pride (we need a version written in rust). Pure BS. If I wrote something in Rust rather than a binding it was because using often Linux based C libs on all Tier 1 platform is as smooth of a process as swimming in shards of glass.

TZubiri 1y ago
While developer experience is obviously a positive, in tradeoff engineering it ranks very low. It is even the sign of a narcissistic developer who values their experience over the user's. Also even if you aim for DX it is very subjective which causes fragmentation, which causes abandonment and other issues, as mentioned in my comment. This is a job sir, if it's painful that's to be expected ( and probably unavoidable too, in 30 years the new generation will hate your "smooth" DX)
- Ygg2 1y ago
  This isn't just a developer experience. It's user experience as well. As in "shit doesn't work on my Windows Arm." Sure reuse where possible, but sometimes you need to rewrite. > which causes abandonment and other issues, as mentioned in my comment. Did Linux being written in C stop Intel from abandoning it? The abandonment issues mentioned are mostly orthogonal. C stopping retreat of corporations from the open source space, is about as likely as a paper mache figure will have an effect on the Dark matter distribution. You are suggesting picking prog. languages will have an effect on global economics. C being unpopular and thus not picked for development is more due to it being a very footgunny language, without modern programming language conveniences. Like package management or linters available out of the box.
  - TZubiri 1y ago
    >Windows Arm That's both an obscure and a complicated OS/Arch combination. >Intel abandoned Linux I don't understand, Intel never maintained Linux. >C being unpopular Lol
    - Ygg2 1y ago
      > That's both an obscure and a complicated OS/Arch combination. Ok. A more realistic example. I want to develop a Windows game, because that's where the audience is. And I want to develop my game in Rust, because I know it better than C++. So, I need a tar/zar/mar library that exists on Linux as a C lib or Rust native library. My goal is to finish the game but don't care about performance or even CVEs that much. > Intel never maintained Linux They definitely did maintain several drivers, and Clear Linux Distribution. But I was talking about their overall strategy. They are pivoting to "Intel first" mantra, sacking many Linux driver maintainers. https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/intel_open_source_commitment/ https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/intel_open_source_com... > Lol What niche is it popular now that hasn't been devoured by C++, Java and others?
    - int_19h 1y ago
      I wouldn't say that Windows/ARM is that obscure anymore, not when there are quite a few laptops on the market with it. But, by the same token, it's not an exotic dev platform. The compilers are there, the libraries already have to compile on Linux/ARM as well as Windows/x64, which means that the same C code will usually compile and work just fine on Windows/ARM. So yeah, no, that's not a valid reason to rewrite it in Rust.

by Ygg2 1y ago

TZubiri 1y ago

While developer experience is obviously a positive, in tradeoff engineering it ranks very low. It is even the sign of a narcissistic developer who values their experience over the user's. Also even if you aim for DX it is very subjective which causes fragmentation, which causes abandonment and other issues, as mentioned in my comment. This is a job sir, if it's painful that's to be expected ( and probably unavoidable too, in 30 years the new generation will hate your "smooth" DX)

Ygg2 1y ago
This isn't just a developer experience. It's user experience as well. As in "shit doesn't work on my Windows Arm." Sure reuse where possible, but sometimes you need to rewrite. > which causes abandonment and other issues, as mentioned in my comment. Did Linux being written in C stop Intel from abandoning it? The abandonment issues mentioned are mostly orthogonal. C stopping retreat of corporations from the open source space, is about as likely as a paper mache figure will have an effect on the Dark matter distribution. You are suggesting picking prog. languages will have an effect on global economics. C being unpopular and thus not picked for development is more due to it being a very footgunny language, without modern programming language conveniences. Like package management or linters available out of the box.
- TZubiri 1y ago
  >Windows Arm That's both an obscure and a complicated OS/Arch combination. >Intel abandoned Linux I don't understand, Intel never maintained Linux. >C being unpopular Lol
  - Ygg2 1y ago
    > That's both an obscure and a complicated OS/Arch combination. Ok. A more realistic example. I want to develop a Windows game, because that's where the audience is. And I want to develop my game in Rust, because I know it better than C++. So, I need a tar/zar/mar library that exists on Linux as a C lib or Rust native library. My goal is to finish the game but don't care about performance or even CVEs that much. > Intel never maintained Linux They definitely did maintain several drivers, and Clear Linux Distribution. But I was talking about their overall strategy. They are pivoting to "Intel first" mantra, sacking many Linux driver maintainers. https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/intel_open_source_commitment/ https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/intel_open_source_com... > Lol What niche is it popular now that hasn't been devoured by C++, Java and others?
  - int_19h 1y ago
    I wouldn't say that Windows/ARM is that obscure anymore, not when there are quite a few laptops on the market with it. But, by the same token, it's not an exotic dev platform. The compilers are there, the libraries already have to compile on Linux/ARM as well as Windows/x64, which means that the same C code will usually compile and work just fine on Windows/ARM. So yeah, no, that's not a valid reason to rewrite it in Rust.