4 ms·

> Yeah, but until a mainstream OS vendor jumps in, I don't see it happen. See what happening? All Rust needs is LLVM support and a stable (probably C) ABI for

> Yeah, but until a mainstream OS vendor jumps in, I don't see it happen. See what happening? All Rust needs is LLVM support and a stable (probably C) ABI for OS features that it can link against (like libc).

pjmlp 11y ago
Becoming a choosen systems programming language. Until then it is just yet another programming language with an AOT compiler, whwre there is already a plethora to chose from. We should learn from history of systems programming languages. None of them survived without being tied to a specific OS.
- fauigerzigerk 11y ago
  >We should learn from history of systems programming languages. None of them survived without being tied to a specific OS. How do you define systems programming? If you define it as writing operating systems then your statement is a bit of a tautology. If you define it as anything other than applications programming then I would say there are successful languages not tied to a specific OS, first and foremost Java.
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    Any language capable of writing drivers, boot sectors...
  - kazinator 11y ago
    Systems programming is the locus of development which spans boot firmware, operating system kernels, drivers, utilities and high performance middleware (API's to the operating system, numeric libraries/codecs, graphics, and whatever.) Systems programming languages are characterized by requiring minimal run-time support, or supporting a version of themselves which is that way (e.g. ISO C has the concept of a "freestanding implementation", and there is a way for such a thing to be conforming). As a rule of thumb, if it has no "freestanding implementation" or equivalent, then it's not a systems language. I'm not aware that a flavor of Java exists with a toolchain that would let us rewrite U-Boot in Java, while keeping its footprint in the same ballpark. (I.e. the firmware image cannot contain an entire Java platform.)
    - nitrogen 11y ago
      Could gcj produce suitable native code?
    - GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
      I feel like that's an overly-aggressive definition of 'systems language.'
- Rusky 11y ago
  At least Rust has Servo and is being used in Firefox- while not really operating systems you would write Rust applications on, it's closer than many dead/dying systems languages have. Another interesting route would be kernel modules- Rust could be a good language to write drivers in, if you need the extra security. I don't think it necessarily needs a whole OS to itself just to survive.
  - pcwalton 11y ago
    Not just kernel modules—even userspace modules that are security-critical and used by lots of projects are good candidates for Rust. Think image decoders, media codecs, audio libraries, GL stacks, database engines, crypto libraries, etc.
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > Until then it is just yet another programming language with an AOT compiler, whwre there is already a plethora to chose from. Well, the borrow checker and safe manual memory management are unique features that allow moving a lot of code that previously had to be C++ for performance reasons to a safe language. (I've elaborated why safe dialects of Ada and such are not the same in previous posts.) I wouldn't characterize Rust as "just yet another systems programming language".
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    You missed the point. I have meant if Rust fails to get adoption as systems programming language, it will become just another business language.

pjmlp 11y ago

Becoming a choosen systems programming language. Until then it is just yet another programming language with an AOT compiler, whwre there is already a plethora to chose from. We should learn from history of systems programming languages. None of them survived without being tied to a specific OS.

fauigerzigerk 11y ago
>We should learn from history of systems programming languages. None of them survived without being tied to a specific OS. How do you define systems programming? If you define it as writing operating systems then your statement is a bit of a tautology. If you define it as anything other than applications programming then I would say there are successful languages not tied to a specific OS, first and foremost Java.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  Any language capable of writing drivers, boot sectors...
- kazinator 11y ago
  Systems programming is the locus of development which spans boot firmware, operating system kernels, drivers, utilities and high performance middleware (API's to the operating system, numeric libraries/codecs, graphics, and whatever.) Systems programming languages are characterized by requiring minimal run-time support, or supporting a version of themselves which is that way (e.g. ISO C has the concept of a "freestanding implementation", and there is a way for such a thing to be conforming). As a rule of thumb, if it has no "freestanding implementation" or equivalent, then it's not a systems language. I'm not aware that a flavor of Java exists with a toolchain that would let us rewrite U-Boot in Java, while keeping its footprint in the same ballpark. (I.e. the firmware image cannot contain an entire Java platform.)
  - nitrogen 11y ago
    Could gcj produce suitable native code?
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
    I feel like that's an overly-aggressive definition of 'systems language.'
Rusky 11y ago
At least Rust has Servo and is being used in Firefox- while not really operating systems you would write Rust applications on, it's closer than many dead/dying systems languages have. Another interesting route would be kernel modules- Rust could be a good language to write drivers in, if you need the extra security. I don't think it necessarily needs a whole OS to itself just to survive.
- pcwalton 11y ago
  Not just kernel modules—even userspace modules that are security-critical and used by lots of projects are good candidates for Rust. Think image decoders, media codecs, audio libraries, GL stacks, database engines, crypto libraries, etc.
pcwalton 11y ago
> Until then it is just yet another programming language with an AOT compiler, whwre there is already a plethora to chose from. Well, the borrow checker and safe manual memory management are unique features that allow moving a lot of code that previously had to be C++ for performance reasons to a safe language. (I've elaborated why safe dialects of Ada and such are not the same in previous posts.) I wouldn't characterize Rust as "just yet another systems programming language".
- pjmlp 11y ago
  You missed the point. I have meant if Rust fails to get adoption as systems programming language, it will become just another business language.