3 ms·
Did you read the article? It agrees with you, and suggests Rust as a best-of-both-worlds option.
by lvh 12y ago
Did you read the article? It agrees with you, and suggests Rust as a best-of-both-worlds option.
- ddingus 12y agoYes I did, and interoperating with C isn't the death of C at all. My statement "That said, we could reduce the number of use cases for C now" covers the, "let's work with C and write more things in Rust..." scenario being proposed. To actually replace C, whatever it is will have to be capable of something like the Linux Kernel, and make low level driver authors happy. Even there, C still works with assembly language.
- Sanddancer 12y agoThere are still a lot of places where Rust isn't useable, especially when you're talking about things like embedded processors. Rust on the AVR, for example, requires very specific versions of llvm and clang to work, and even then, you have to write all of your IO code in a separate library, most likely in C. And it just rolls downhill from there. Wanna support the V850 that's found in a lot of automotive control systems? Nope. Rust doesn't quite have the ability to get down and dirty to do the kind of register tweaking you tend to do when you're using a processor with lots of IO you need to manage.