3 ms·
> First, because it promotes an "us vs them" mindset I was always intrigued by the maturity about how the Rust team approached this sort of thing. IIRC years a
by rkangel 2mo ago
> First, because it promotes an "us vs them" mindset
I was always intrigued by the maturity about how the Rust team approached this sort of thing. IIRC years ago you and I had a back and forth on me thinking it would be helpful to have a "Why Rust is better than C++" type page.
Seeing an alternative approach from Andrew Kelley in recent weeks has really hammered home the value of the approach the Rust team took in terms of community building.
- pizlonator 2mo ago[flagged]
- ModernMech 2mo agoNo one is lobbying to make programming in C illegal, let alone the Rust community.
- rkangel 2mo agoCan you provide a citation to this fairly major claim?
- surajrmal 2mo agoI don't think there is anything wrong with increasing liability for writing preventable bugs. The floor should be raised as our tools improve and the negative outcomes of these bugs increase. Making c illegal is not a goal of anyone I know of.
- landr0id 2mo agoComments like these are why, even if Fil-C has cool technical accomplishments, I find it hard to speak positively about it. You unfortunately seem to forgo all nuance and push disingenuous arguments which fuel the cycle with similarly disingenuous people. I'll do you a favor though and cite a few things related to "lobbying" The White House put out an RFI regarding open-source security: https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Summary-of-the-2023-Request-for-Information-on-Open-Source-Software-Security.pdf https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024... Rust foundation's response: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/ONCD-2023-0002-0045 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/ONCD-2023-0002-0045 Neither have anything to do with making "programming in C illegal".