Rust For The Linux Kernel Sent Out For Review A Fourth Time

[OnikenX]

I don't know what y'all are talking about rust being a problem.
As a c and rust developer I see the integration of rust in the kernel as a really good ideia.
It takes the responsability of memory safety from the dev to the compiler and libraries, if the code has memory bugs it will not compile, at lest with non-unsafe code.
I see this as an absolute win as for easing to develop new code and turning the kernel more secure.
C is an easy language to learn but difficult to make applications with, while rust is the opposite.

[jacob]

I don't know what y'all are talking about rust being a problem.
As a c and rust developer I see the integration of rust in the kernel as a really good ideia.
It takes the responsability of memory safety from the dev to the compiler and libraries, if the code has memory bugs it will not compile, at lest with non-unsafe code.
I see this as an absolute win as for easing to develop new code and turning the kernel more secure.
C is an easy language to learn but difficult to make applications with, while rust is the opposite.

It's not a problem and yes it's a win. But whiners gonna whine and haters gonna hate no matter what. Some people can't get over the fact that it's not 1972 any more and some believe that Linux was meant to be an eternal monument to C and Unix.

[furtadopires]

I don't know what y'all are talking about rust being a problem.
As a c and rust developer I see the integration of rust in the kernel as a really good ideia.
It takes the responsability of memory safety from the dev to the compiler and libraries, if the code has memory bugs it will not compile, at lest with non-unsafe code.
I see this as an absolute win as for easing to develop new code and turning the kernel more secure.
C is an easy language to learn but difficult to make applications with, while rust is the opposite.

Don't mind those critics, most of them are from old C++ developers who are afraid that an increase rust adoption might make their knowledge obsolete in some places. If even Linus Torvads is somehow considering mixing his pure C kernel with another language, is because rust is already going in the right way.

The only negative critics that should be considered are from kernel developers and actual rust developers, otherwise it's just nerd raging.

[betty567]

It's not a problem and yes it's a win. But whiners gonna whine and haters gonna hate no matter what. Some people can't get over the fact that it's not 1972 any more and some believe that Linux was meant to be an eternal monument to C and Unix.

OS kernels are a low level endeavor. C is an extremely mature and successful low level language.

C++ was an attempt to bolt high level features onto a low level language, and decades later they are still trying to get it right.
Rust is an attempt to bolt low level features onto a high level language, and it has never been successful, nor will it be.
Both are an attempt to make programming "easier" for people that cannot handle true low level programming.

The reason we have not seen a better low-level language than C yet is nobody is making new low level languages. I'm sure somebody could make an improved C just by modifying some of the more obvious shortcomings, but every single attempt has been to bolt a helicopter onto a Yugo, and they all failed.

[betty567]

Don't mind those critics, most of them are from old C++ developers who are afraid that an increase rust adoption might make their knowledge obsolete in some places. If even Linus Torvads is somehow considering mixing his pure C kernel with another language, is because rust is already going in the right way.

The only negative critics that should be considered is from kernel developers and actual rust developers, otherwise it's just nerd raging.

A naive young person who thinks they can "fix" computing while standing on the shoulders of giants. How cute.

[smitty3268]

Rust is an attempt to bolt low level features onto a high level language

LOL. Your definition of high level language must be different than everyone else's.

[catpig]

They probably saw the state of Redox after four years compared to the state of Hurd after 30 years and figured Rust must be doing something right.

Genius ^^

[bachchain]

Rust is an attempt to bolt low level features onto a high level language, and it has never been successful, nor will it be.

Just so we're both clear, you're saying this in the comment section of a news article about how Rust is getting integrated into one of the most important and widely used pieces of software in the world.

[betty567]

Just so we're both clear, you're saying this in the comment section of a news article about how Rust is getting integrated into one of the most important and widely used pieces of software in the world.

Who said this is ever getting merged?

Rust has no success stories, and if it ever gets into the kernel, it will be a disaster there too just like it was in Firefox. You must be part of the Rust marketing machine.

[betty567]

LOL. Your definition of high level language must be different than everyone else's.

You must be some "new school" programmer who lacks accomplishments but thinks he has it all figured out.

C is excellent for an OS kernel because memory management is 100% up to the developer. You decide your own allocation strategy, you decide when and how to initialize memory, your own re-use strategy, and you decide when to free memory. There are no features that must be abstained from when doing low-level things, there is no "unsafe" portion of the language that one must rely exclusively on in these low-level scenarios. No "garbage collection", which is a "for dummies" feature for people who cannot keep track of allocations. But Rust doesn't use "garbage collection", it uses "unicorn farts that nobody can quite describe" but don't call it garbage collection, because garbage collection has a negative connotation. Rust is a win for it's own marketing folks, and nothing else.