Originally posted by timofonic
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Rust-Written Redox OS 0.8 Released With i686 Support, Audio & Multi-Display Working
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by birdie View Post
Copyleft licensed projects get picked by corporations a lot easier and faster than those licenced under copyright licenses such as GPL which don't allow you to breathe unless explicitly allowed.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by cb88 View Post
The problem with that... is it because just another almost unix that would be incompatible enough to be annoying.
And a better Unix was already written as Plan9... so frankly you gotta either do better than Plan9 or you aren't truely trying to one up unix you are just riding on its coat tails.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JackLilhammers View Post
I agree with you, but you got them reversed: GPL is a copyleft license and MIT is a copyright one
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by Waethorn View Post
The better OS's are always the ones that never got finished. Plan9, CP/M, Longhorn....
Practically every excuse was backwards compatibility - at the cost of real innovation.
Ditto for IA-64.
Most of the time, going with the new comer is taking a step back in time. The newer system is there where the incumbents were several years ago. Most people will ask themselves why they should take a step back. Possible future benefits of the radical innovation doesn't help them right now.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
I absolutely do not understand the popularity of Rust. Some reasons why I wouldn't use Rust:
1. Memory safety. This is supposedly the big reason why we should use Rust. The CHERI memory-protection features historically allow memory-unsafe programming languages such as C and C++ to be adapted to provide strong, compatible, and efficient protection against many currently widely exploited vulnerabilities.
2. Performance, Rust is slow as a snail in real programs compared to C: https://ehnree.github.io/documents/papers/rustvsc.pdf
Generally speaking, C still dominates Rust by a relatively wide margin in terms of execution time. Consequently, there is definitely a performance cost associated with using Rust instead of C.
https://renato.athaydes.com/posts/re...sp-part-2.html
Last, but not least, notice how Common Lisp is the fastest language of all, beating even Rust, on the smaller runs (and notice that this is no hello-world, it loads over 70,000 words into a hash-table, then encodes 1,000 phone numbers using those words - all of that in a mere 59ms, well ahead of Rust, somehow, which needs 89ms!).
3. Ease of use: https://ehnree.github.io/documents/papers/rustvsc.pdf
However, there are still some annoyances about Rust that can, at times, make implementing a simple algorithm difficult.
What's the point of Rust?
- Likes 7
Comment
-
Originally posted by Classical View PostI absolutely do not understand the popularity of Rust. Some reasons why I wouldn't use Rust. What's the point of Rust?
Not a single person cares about what you think about Rust. The results of the language already speak for itself.
Spend less time yelling angrily at clouds and more time doing something useful with your life.
No one should waste time arguing about the usefulness of Rust here or anywhere else.
- Likes 11
Comment
-
Originally posted by timofonic View PostIt's stupid they support 32bit hardware in a modern operating system aimed at innovation, they are wasting efforts instead improving essential hardware support such as USB.
Yes, you might question priorities such as supporting USB or a "modern" architecture like aarch64, but ultimately their decision to look into safety and size correctness rather than features is actually fairly admirable.
And lets be honest. If they implemented USB, most will still turn around and say... "its useless because the Steam DRM Platform doesn't run on it". So why would they prioritize "desktop usage" anyway when there are more important things in computing?Last edited by kpedersen; 24 November 2022, 09:42 AM.
- Likes 5
Comment
Comment