Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rust Infrastructure Pull Request Submitted For Linux 6.1!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by darkonix View Post

    Not for Lnux and Linus Torvalds evidently. It is clearly going to be merged.
    I think he has some secret plan to make Rust available outside LLVM world, LTO too I hope too. Just sayin'.
    Last edited by timofonic; 03 October 2022, 12:33 AM.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by karolherbst View Post

      I am not arguing with trolls who don't actually code themselves, but only have "theoretical pointless discussions" around programming languages...

      Everybody doing it for a living will tell you that it's a no brainer to have proper tooling around a language, which includes a good and competent compiler and a competent standard library. We don't want to have to think for 5 hours which of the 100 implementations I have to use to get peak performance. We want to use the language. And e.g. Rusts _huge_ benefit is, that it actually made the package managing part of the language and that third party libs which make sense, get pulled into the stdlib after a controlled process.

      Having a standard would make all of that much harder and would actually sabotage it.

      If you don't believe me, ask other full time programmers, they'll probably tell you something similar.
      Seeing that you have written some C, I was hoping that you are not like the rustafarians I hate. I was wrong. Your insults are the same (YoU DoN'T CoDe1!1!1!).

      Well having a good compiler is important in order to use a language. Having 100 good compilers is way better. And in order to have more than 1 compiler, you need an agreement that says "if the code follows these rules, it should compiler and behave like that". This is a standard. For rust the de facto "standard" is the output of rustc... What you are saying about wasting 5 hours choosing among 100 implementations sounds like what a windows fanboy would say against Linux distros (yes I can insult as well, I know you are not a windows fanboy but you are using similar arguments). And it isnt't even true. For example the vast majority of people use glibc as a libc implementation without thinking about alternatives. In any case, my point was that the standard libraries should not be considered part of the language but something complementary to that. And guess what, the discussion about stdlibs is irrelevant to kernel coding, since they are not available.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by timofonic View Post

        I think he has some secret plan to make Rust available outside LLVM world, LTO too I hope too. Just sayin'.
        LoL, LTO works with gcc. But not for compiling Linux. And none is talking about it since llvm LTO got merged.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by marios View Post

          Seeing that you have written some C, I was hoping that you are not like the rustafarians I hate. I was wrong. Your insults are the same (YoU DoN'T CoDe1!1!1!).

          Well having a good compiler is important in order to use a language. Having 100 good compilers is way better. And in order to have more than 1 compiler, you need an agreement that says "if the code follows these rules, it should compiler and behave like that". This is a standard. For rust the de facto "standard" is the output of rustc... What you are saying about wasting 5 hours choosing among 100 implementations sounds like what a windows fanboy would say against Linux distros (yes I can insult as well, I know you are not a windows fanboy but you are using similar arguments). And it isnt't even true. For example the vast majority of people use glibc as a libc implementation without thinking about alternatives. In any case, my point was that the standard libraries should not be considered part of the language but something complementary to that. And guess what, the discussion about stdlibs is irrelevant to kernel coding, since they are not available.
          my point was, that if I choose to use a programming language, I want to get shit done and not have to think about how to create and modify basic things like strings... And if a programming language doesn't give me that out of the box, then yes, I call this programming language a terrible one which nobody shall ever use.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

            Indeed and this isn't even something specific to Rust (full time Scala/Java programmer which also have strong package management + cross OS support).

            Also having standard for a language is largely a gimmick unless that standard provides something useful to the table (i.e. a formally verified specification which can guarantee certain properties). C has no such thing, and the main reason a standard in C exists in the first place is due to historical reasons (back then proprietary compilers were a thing where as now its kind of stupid, even having multiple OS implementations of a language is typically rare). I guess you can argue that C's role today is largely delegated to being a high level assembler, but LLVM is doing a better job of that and again, there isn't a LLVM standard either.
            right, and the C situation lead to everybody implementing linked list primitives or random other stuff, because there is not this one core lib everybody likes to use. Glib does contain quite a lot, but then you might not want to pull in glib as a dependency out of political or pragmatical reasons.

            Rust is actually doing a lot of the things right a lot of the other "low level system programming languages" failed to address for a long time. And then if you want to address this, you get those people saying "but the language should only define the language, because ....." whatever they come up with this time.

            There is way too less pragmatic thinking and too much a focus on the "perfect technical way", which is pointless if reality disagrees.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post

              Nouveau. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Weasel knows that already. He frequently gets into these types of arguments and always insists anyone who disagrees with him is an idiot. I don't think it matters what kind of experience the other person involved has.
              I don't think people are idiots, just that often people focus way too much on what's "technically" the best solution, where it's obvious from the start that it's some totally irrelevant and pointless argument to begin with.

              For all I care, people can argue about "languages shouldn't contain stdlibs", but if they expect others to actually listen to them and to follow their "advise" and if that would actually make my (and all others) work harder, we got a problem.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by karolherbst View Post
                ...
                Just to be clear, I was referring to Weasel in my post. Not you.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                  Just to be clear, I was referring to Weasel in my post. Not you.
                  ohhh... Though I also have to learn to be less confrontational on such topics... I think...

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by jacob View Post
                    C is considered fast because its bias towards base+offset addressing was well suited for the PDP11.
                    As opposed to what type of addressing? All modern architectures use base+offset addressing.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by andrei_me View Post
                      Lol, you are answering the developer of rusticl, the OpenCL implemented in rust
                      Well that explains a lot doesn't it? Wouldn't expect any logic out of it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X