Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

msrc-blog.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 102 posts

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#21

Post by dilyevsky »

steveklabnik wrote: post #18
rvz wrote: post #17

> For comparison, last week we caught a significant race condition in another Kubernetes-related project we maintain called Helm (written in Go) that has been there for a year or more, and which passed the race checker for Go. That error would never have escaped the Rust compiler, preventing the bug from ever existing in the first place While the possible security benefits of Rust is interesting in software like Kube…

Kubernetes is an ecosystem. It doesn’t need to be written in Rust for Rust components to play a part. Helm is not Kubernetes, for example, though your comment seems to blur the two. There are folks writing stuff to interact with the broader ecosystem in Rust. That’s one of the interesting bits of networked systems! You can be heterogeneous with languages more easily when the network/api is the boundary.

Doesn’t microsoft own helm now? Nothing is stopping them rewriting it in rust since it can easily interact with kubernetes via rest api

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#22

Post by hu3 »

wrs wrote: post #20
steveklabnik wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go has a shorter time, and that’s the measuring stick in this area.

Go appears to have a shorter time, because you don't realize how much higher-level stuff you're just expected to do The Right Way, with no support from the language or libraries. So you're free to think you've finished learning Go, but then the actual learning begins.

"The Right Way" lies in a wide spectrum and depends on the project.

It's often about how fast one can deliver maintainable software that works well enough.

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#23

Post by zozbot234 »

wrs wrote: post #20
steveklabnik wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go has a shorter time, and that’s the measuring stick in this area.

Go appears to have a shorter time, because you don't realize how much higher-level stuff you're just expected to do The Right Way, with no support from the language or libraries. So you're free to think you've finished learning Go, but then the actual learning begins.

Right, it's a false economy. Though, to be fair, the Java/C# ecosystem has the same problem to an even greater degree. Not to mention popular "dynamic" languages such as Python, Ruby etc.

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#24

Post by jerf »

wrs wrote: post #20
steveklabnik wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go has a shorter time, and that’s the measuring stick in this area.

Go appears to have a shorter time, because you don't realize how much higher-level stuff you're just expected to do The Right Way, with no support from the language or libraries. So you're free to think you've finished learning Go, but then the actual learning begins.

Even accounting for what you say, it's a short learning curve compared to most languages. It's not like there's any programming language in the world where you just read the manual through once and, boom, instantly you know exactly how to architect a multi-person-century project right out of the gate or something.

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#25

Post by monocasa »

mappu wrote: post #10
shock wrote: post #2

> One of the biggest ones to point out is that async runtimes are still a bit unclear. There are currently two different options to choose from, each of them with their own tradeoffs and problems. Also, many of the implementation details are tied to specific runtimes, meaning that if you have a dependency that uses one runtime over another, you’ll often be locked into that runtime choice. My understanding of how asyn…

Going off on a tangent, but this exact problem would be a worst-case scenario for Go getting user-defined generic types instead of only the current blessed ones. t. C++ developer with a mixed std::string/QString/BSTR codebase.

Well, that's the current state of Go if the half dozen blessed versions don't fit your use case. Everyone just writes their own slightly incompatible versions.

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#27

Post by melling »

“For comparison, last week we caught a significant race condition in another Kubernetes-related project we maintain called Helm (written in Go) that has been there for a year or more, and which passed the race checker for Go. That error would never have escaped the Rust compiler, preventing the bug from ever existing in the first place.”

I’ve heard people brag that Haskell is a great language because it’s supposedly easier to write correct code.

Rust has this same reputation?

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#28

Post by steveklabnik »

Thaxll wrote: post #26

I don't believe for one second that it takes just a couple of weeks to an average SE to be proficient in Rust.

It really depends on so many factors it’s extremely hard to tell. We’ve brought folks at Cloudflare up to speed roughly that fast.

“average” and “proficient” are both very variable in that statement, imho.

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#29

Post by tybit »

melling wrote: post #27

“For comparison, last week we caught a significant race condition in another Kubernetes-related project we maintain called Helm (written in Go) that has been there for a year or more, and which passed the race checker for Go. That error would never have escaped the Rust compiler, preventing the bug from ever existing in the first place.” I’ve heard people brag that Haskell is a great language because it’s supposedly…

Yes, though I believe Rust has already proven this more in practice than Haskell has.

Rust has many advocates now at places like Mozilla, Amazon and Microsoft that have delivered critical software in Rust that they believe has made it safer.

Re: The Safety Boat: Kubernetes and Rust

#30

Post by yongjik »

melling wrote: post #27

“For comparison, last week we caught a significant race condition in another Kubernetes-related project we maintain called Helm (written in Go) that has been there for a year or more, and which passed the race checker for Go. That error would never have escaped the Rust compiler, preventing the bug from ever existing in the first place.” I’ve heard people brag that Haskell is a great language because it’s supposedly…

I think the common saying is that once your Haskell code compiles, it's usually correct.

The fine print is that nobody claimed it's easy to write Haskell code that compiles.

Post reply on HN