Rust-Written Replacement To GNU Coreutils Progressing, Some Binaries Now Faster

[pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx]

I will need to see benchmarks of any language being faster than C that is not named machine code or assembly. I find it VERY hard to believe that any Rust language program can beat a pure C language program. I have some friends that are die hard Rust fans and I don't see the point in learning it when I already know C and C++. Throw in a bit of shell scripting, Perl Scripting, and good old C and you can write an entire OS!

People writing highly optimized Rust versions of important tools we use everyday that are much faster than the originals is already a thing.

https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep

Lots of benchmarks: https://blog.burntsushi.net/ripgrep/

There are a bunch of other Rust versions of essential tools that are worth looking into. Some offer far better performance, some offer more intuitive syntax, some offer a bunch of nice new features, or some mix thereof.

fd for find: https://github.com/sharkdp/fd
lsd for ls: https://github.com/Peltoche/lsd
bat for cat: https://github.com/sharkdp/bat

[catpig]

typical high horse attitude that has been proven many times to lead to failure. It is not the protection from failure, but learning from failure that makes us better.

So by that logic we should remove e.g. railings to prevent people from falling down stairs.... Car vendors used to have that absurd attitude, too, claiming "our cars are designed for driving, not crashing" - which was exactly the problem, they should've been designed (in part) for crashing. "Oh we'll just fix the bugs once we encounter them" is a great attitude for hobby projects, but not so much if you're dealing with stuff that matters.

[elatllat]

I'm glad people

> ...spent the time to improve GNU Coreutils...

by replacing it with rust; a modern language. I wonder if there are other language implementations; perl, python, graal-native, etc...

[er888kh]

But doesn't the Coreutils inherntly need to use unsafe code in rust (because it's directly interacting with the operating system)?
It doesn't gain the advantage of rust's memory safety, right?
Or is it still reduces the amount of unsafe code they use, and they still gain it on all the other code?
I am really asking, I don't know if my assumption is correct.

Well, not related to coreutils, but the recent polkit vulnerability would have been avoided if there was basic array bounds checking in place. Sometimes even trivial security features become life saving in case of a small nasty bug.

[Quackdoc]

Really? It is in the title of the article. Says right there, Replacemement.

how the hell does that equivocate to cancel culture? Ps4 was cancel culture because it replaced the ps3, RX 6800 was cancel culture, RTX, fucking hell people who git hip replacement? fucking cancel culture.

let me be guilty of cancel culture for a second and recommend you get a replacement education

[sdack]

Mathematics and formal logic is not an imagination. ...

No, but you thinking this was a substitute for not having proof is. We are not talking about mathematics and formal logic being imaginations, and as long as you do not provide proof for GNU Coreutils being unsafe do you have none.

Rust is not a product of "learning from failure" when it wants to protect people from making failures. Rust still allows you to make all sorts of failures. You only have not understood the value that comes from making failures. Rust is not progress, Rust is merely overbearing.

[sdack]

There is a certain irony to you whining about language choice and then beating the tired drum of "cancel culture". Anyone sane can understand what is meant by the title.

I am not whining. You are. I only answered somebody's question. You should learn to read before you want to spread your definition of sanity around.

[sdack]

how the hell does that equivocate to cancel culture? ...

Again you need to ask. Go and look it up. I am not going to do it for you.

[rmfx]

Interesting project. Let’s see how it goes and if it becomes better than gnu coreutils. That’s a good way to clean some old dust in gnu anyway.

One more fragmentation in the open-source ecosystem when the need is about agreeing on having all the OS components under one single foundation so that the best efforts can be spent on one single code base and achieve a true universal competitor to win and mac.
But it’s like global warming… everyone knows, nobody does.

But let’s see how rust based components deliver.

PS : They should contribute to redox since it shares the same goals about a full rust based os.
The project is almost dead and that might help.

[BesiegedAce]

I am not whining. You are. I only answered somebody's question. You should learn to read before you want to spread your definition of sanity around.

You're whining. The article uses "replacement" because in a regular environment why would you use multiple sets of coreutils. If you have these installed, you'd probably be using them. Everyone's still free to choose what set of coreutils they use, so it really isn't "cancel culture", and you're really just whining about a single word.