5 ms·

If rust didn’t provide value to the Linux kernel, there’s no way it would have made out of the experimental phase. Rust isn’t an invading tribe. It’s just a to

by josephg 11mo ago

If rust didn’t provide value to the Linux kernel, there’s no way it would have made out of the experimental phase. Rust isn’t an invading tribe. It’s just a tool.

_fe 11mo ago
> If rust didn’t provide value to the Linux kernel, there’s no way it would have made out of the experimental phase. That’s “appeal to authority” fallacy.
- keybored 11mo ago
  Pointing out that something was iterated upon and adopted in the place it was introduced is now a fallacy, amazing.
  - keybored 11mo ago
    - Rust is invading the Linux Kernel - Actually, The collective Linux Kernel found that it was good enough to graduate from the experimental ph— - Aha! You are appealing to the authority of the Linux Kernel. That’s a fallacy.
- josephg 11mo ago
  You're right that I'm appealing to authority, but that doesn't make my argument invalid. The people who decided rust has value in the kernel are linux kernel developers. Ie, traditional C developers who see value in using rust in linux. Rust in linux has caused plenty of headaches. If rust didn't add commensurate value to make the trouble worth it, it wouldn't be getting adopted.
anal_reactor 11mo ago
> Rust isn’t an invading tribe People doing open-source work often feel very tribal about their code and block ideas that are good but threaten their position in the community. Essentially same thing as office politics except it's not about money, it's about personal pride.
- bgwalter 11mo ago
  I'm sure that submitting a PR to a Rust project to rewrite parts in Ada/SPARK would be met with great enthusiasm.
  - kolektiv 11mo ago
    If anyone submitted such a PR to one of my projects and could explain compelling benefits for why doing so would be a general improvement, even considering trade-offs of increased complexity/maintainability, etc., then I'd be delighted they'd cared enough to improve my software.
    - jciuqgfb 11mo ago
      [flagged]
      - Xylakant 11mo ago
        How is the drive-by statement of a random GH account with 9 followers representative of any community. What's the point you're trying to make? That there's people with shitty behavior in the Rust community? No surprise here, there are. That there's trolls out there that just do this for fun? It's the internet! I hope that doesn't surprise anyone by now.
      - bmicraft 11mo ago
        What are you implying? I ask because you aren't actually saying anything yourself.
      - dralley 11mo ago
        This is the 2nd throwaway account spamming this link, and we're supposed to see this as evidence of the Rust community acting poorly?
  - Xylakant 11mo ago
    Why? It depends on what you want to replace, but the Rust project has a long history of using tools written in other languages. Python is used a lot in build tooling, bors-ng was written in Elixir, llvm is written in c, ... gcc-rs doesn't contain a lot of rust code either, it's purely other languages according to https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs Fundamentally, if a tool is good and provides benefits then why not use it? You'll be met with concerns about maintainability if you just airdrop something written in Ada/SPARK, but that's fair - just as it was fair that the introduction of Rust in the linux kernel was indeed met with concerns about maintainability. It seems that those were resolved to the satisfcation of the group that decides things and the cost/benefit balance was considered net positive.
bgwalter 11mo ago
[flagged]
- marcusb 11mo ago
  https://www.redox-os.org/ https://www.redox-os.org/
  - galangalalgol 11mo ago
    Add in theseus, tock, hubris, and hermit-os. That is just the non academic ones. As for why none of them are widely used? Drivers. It wasn't that long ago redox didn't even support usb devices. The linux kernel is a giant mashup of oodles of drivers.
bgwalter 11mo ago
The "provide value" argument can be used for anything. Modern software politics and foundation sponsorship pressure are so complex that this argument may not even be true. It may be true in this case, but certainly you have seen corporate bloat being added to "open" source projects before.
- embedding-shape 11mo ago
  > Modern software politics and foundation sponsorship pressure are so complex that this argument may not even be true. May not, or may yes. As far as I know with my own interactions with the Linux kernel community, is that it's very different from typical "modern software politics", at least different enough that I'd make the claim they're special from the other communities. If there is any community I'd assume makes most of their choices disregarding politics or pressures and purely on technical measures, it would be the Linux kernel community. With that said, no person nor community is perfect, but unless there is some hard evidence pointing to that the Linux people were forced to accept Rust into the kernel for whatever reason, then at least I'd refrain from believing in such theories.
iurbwdj 11mo ago
[flagged]
- cmeacham98 11mo ago
  Didn't Hector step down essentially as a direct result of that behavior? https://www.phoronix.com/news/Asahi-Linux-Lead-No-Upstream https://www.phoronix.com/news/Asahi-Linux-Lead-No-Upstream Do you have an example of other R4L maintainers harassment? Because you've spammed the same single example 3-4 times on this post alone.
  - jciuqgfb 11mo ago
    [flagged]
    - bmicraft 11mo ago
      Do you usually create a new account for every second comment?
- josephg 11mo ago
  I’m not really sure what point you’re making. All I see there is - or was - some unclear management within Linux itself. - There was an experiment to have rust in Linux. It got provisional approval from Linus. - Some people in the Linux kernel blocked essentially any changes being made to make the rust experiment able to succeed. - Some people who were trying to get rust into Linux got frustrated. Some quit as a result. - Eventually Linus stepped in and told everyone to play nice. This whole drama involved like 5 people. It’s not “the majority of the rust community”. And it kinda had nothing to do with rust the language. It was really a management / technical leadership challenge. And it seems like it’s been addressed by leadership stepping in and giving clearer guidelines around how rust and C should interoperate, both at a technical and interpersonal level. So what’s your point? Is rust bad because some people had an argument about it on the Linux kernel mailing list about it? ‘Cos uh, that’s not exactly a new thing.
  - 11mo ago

by josephg 11mo ago

If rust didn’t provide value to the Linux kernel, there’s no way it would have made out of the experimental phase. Rust isn’t an invading tribe. It’s just a tool.

_fe 11mo ago

> If rust didn’t provide value to the Linux kernel, there’s no way it would have made out of the experimental phase. That’s “appeal to authority” fallacy.

keybored 11mo ago
Pointing out that something was iterated upon and adopted in the place it was introduced is now a fallacy, amazing.
- keybored 11mo ago
  - Rust is invading the Linux Kernel - Actually, The collective Linux Kernel found that it was good enough to graduate from the experimental ph— - Aha! You are appealing to the authority of the Linux Kernel. That’s a fallacy.
josephg 11mo ago
You're right that I'm appealing to authority, but that doesn't make my argument invalid. The people who decided rust has value in the kernel are linux kernel developers. Ie, traditional C developers who see value in using rust in linux. Rust in linux has caused plenty of headaches. If rust didn't add commensurate value to make the trouble worth it, it wouldn't be getting adopted.

anal_reactor 11mo ago

> Rust isn’t an invading tribe People doing open-source work often feel very tribal about their code and block ideas that are good but threaten their position in the community. Essentially same thing as office politics except it's not about money, it's about personal pride.

bgwalter 11mo ago
I'm sure that submitting a PR to a Rust project to rewrite parts in Ada/SPARK would be met with great enthusiasm.
- kolektiv 11mo ago
  If anyone submitted such a PR to one of my projects and could explain compelling benefits for why doing so would be a general improvement, even considering trade-offs of increased complexity/maintainability, etc., then I'd be delighted they'd cared enough to improve my software.
  - jciuqgfb 11mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Xylakant 11mo ago
      How is the drive-by statement of a random GH account with 9 followers representative of any community. What's the point you're trying to make? That there's people with shitty behavior in the Rust community? No surprise here, there are. That there's trolls out there that just do this for fun? It's the internet! I hope that doesn't surprise anyone by now.
    - bmicraft 11mo ago
      What are you implying? I ask because you aren't actually saying anything yourself.
    - dralley 11mo ago
      This is the 2nd throwaway account spamming this link, and we're supposed to see this as evidence of the Rust community acting poorly?
- Xylakant 11mo ago
  Why? It depends on what you want to replace, but the Rust project has a long history of using tools written in other languages. Python is used a lot in build tooling, bors-ng was written in Elixir, llvm is written in c, ... gcc-rs doesn't contain a lot of rust code either, it's purely other languages according to https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs Fundamentally, if a tool is good and provides benefits then why not use it? You'll be met with concerns about maintainability if you just airdrop something written in Ada/SPARK, but that's fair - just as it was fair that the introduction of Rust in the linux kernel was indeed met with concerns about maintainability. It seems that those were resolved to the satisfcation of the group that decides things and the cost/benefit balance was considered net positive.

bgwalter 11mo ago

[flagged]

marcusb 11mo ago
https://www.redox-os.org/ https://www.redox-os.org/
- galangalalgol 11mo ago
  Add in theseus, tock, hubris, and hermit-os. That is just the non academic ones. As for why none of them are widely used? Drivers. It wasn't that long ago redox didn't even support usb devices. The linux kernel is a giant mashup of oodles of drivers.

bgwalter 11mo ago

The "provide value" argument can be used for anything. Modern software politics and foundation sponsorship pressure are so complex that this argument may not even be true. It may be true in this case, but certainly you have seen corporate bloat being added to "open" source projects before.

embedding-shape 11mo ago
> Modern software politics and foundation sponsorship pressure are so complex that this argument may not even be true. May not, or may yes. As far as I know with my own interactions with the Linux kernel community, is that it's very different from typical "modern software politics", at least different enough that I'd make the claim they're special from the other communities. If there is any community I'd assume makes most of their choices disregarding politics or pressures and purely on technical measures, it would be the Linux kernel community. With that said, no person nor community is perfect, but unless there is some hard evidence pointing to that the Linux people were forced to accept Rust into the kernel for whatever reason, then at least I'd refrain from believing in such theories.

iurbwdj 11mo ago

[flagged]

cmeacham98 11mo ago
Didn't Hector step down essentially as a direct result of that behavior? https://www.phoronix.com/news/Asahi-Linux-Lead-No-Upstream https://www.phoronix.com/news/Asahi-Linux-Lead-No-Upstream Do you have an example of other R4L maintainers harassment? Because you've spammed the same single example 3-4 times on this post alone.
- jciuqgfb 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  - bmicraft 11mo ago
    Do you usually create a new account for every second comment?
josephg 11mo ago
I’m not really sure what point you’re making. All I see there is - or was - some unclear management within Linux itself. - There was an experiment to have rust in Linux. It got provisional approval from Linus. - Some people in the Linux kernel blocked essentially any changes being made to make the rust experiment able to succeed. - Some people who were trying to get rust into Linux got frustrated. Some quit as a result. - Eventually Linus stepped in and told everyone to play nice. This whole drama involved like 5 people. It’s not “the majority of the rust community”. And it kinda had nothing to do with rust the language. It was really a management / technical leadership challenge. And it seems like it’s been addressed by leadership stepping in and giving clearer guidelines around how rust and C should interoperate, both at a technical and interpersonal level. So what’s your point? Is rust bad because some people had an argument about it on the Linux kernel mailing list about it? ‘Cos uh, that’s not exactly a new thing.
- 11mo ago