Originally posted by Alexmitter
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux Kernel's Preliminary Rust Code Seeing 64-bit POWER Support
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Alexmitter View PostSo was Go, the last hype language. And here we are now in the post Go world.
Go is doing great. It's a language which makes perfect sense in certain domains, kernel development is not one of those and I haven't seen anyone argue that it is.
As for Rust inclusion into the mainline kernel, I can't see it happen until the language has truly stabilized, I would also think that GCC Rust support would be a key factor. In other words, I think it will spend a very long time in Linux-next.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by all3f0r1 View Post
BTW the "Rust fan-base" as you call it is actually very heterogeneous. You seem to imply that "Rust fans" are only composed of hype hunters (might be, to some degree), but as far as I can tell, it's mostly composed of a very broad range of programmers, coming from C, Python, ASM, JS...
1. C and asm is programming, python and js is scripting. Both things are useful but different. There is also the thing I call "emulated programming", which is using scripting (usually python) in order to write something that looks like a slow program.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by mlau View Postthe whole "it makes you code much more safe without having any performance downside" is hyperbole/marketing.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by tuxd3v View PostI still think that t[rust], is not, at least yet, there as a substitution for C..
The more realistic approach for long term improvement, would be to make the language safer with extensions or to use hardware assisted memory safety (such as memory tagging).Last edited by kvuj; 23 March 2021, 08:55 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by mlau View Postthe whole "it makes you code much more safe without having any performance downside" is hyperbole/marketing.
There are also plenty of ports of C tools written into Rust and they
1. Are faster than the C equivalent while being more safe
2. Same speed as the C equivalent while being more safe
3. Slower than the C equivalent while being more safe however if the safety checks are disabled/removed (i.e. bounds checking on arrays) then the speeds are equivalent.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by miquels View Post
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by reba View Post
So you're saying Reinhold Messner is a bad climber because he uses equipment to make his ascent more safe?
More of a silly analogy: the seasoned surgeon is operating in an established institution which was there for 50 years and will still be there in foreseeable future, the D-student is operating in a private commercial entity who only say "no warranties, but trust us, we know what we are doing" and "everything is subject to change in any time, but again, trust us, we know what we are doing".
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment