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

Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 107 posts

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#81

Post by whytevuhuni »

cantrelate wrote: post #80

Forget all this drama, I wonder if we can have a Borrow Checker, like the one Rust has, implemented on top of C as an optional feature? And since it's just a compile-time thing, it won't cause any incompatibility or breakage at runtime. I love the idea of having the memory safety features that the Rust compiler offers, but I find Rust unreadable, it hurts my eyes, why do we have to write "let" to define a variable? w…

To me it seems like the goal was to be a C++ alternative, not C.

I do half-agree though... I think somewhere inside Rust there is a hidden simpler language, with only a tiny subset of its features, but which still has lifetimes. I'd love to see that language.

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#82

Post by troad »

masfoobar wrote: post #69
troad wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's been adopted for core components in Firefox, and Chromium/Android are likewise moving towards adopting Rust. In general, Rust has seen broad industry adoption from the likes of FAANG, M$, etc. Rust has seen slight interest, but saying that companies like Microsoft are 'moving towards adopting Rust' is just flat out wrong (you realise MS make their own language stack, right? and that it's far more used than Rus…

> I quite like Rust, but these are early days, and it is not yet clear that Rust will be the language that wins this fight There has been a number of languages in 20 years that have been given hype - some more than others... yet slowly disappear into the corner. Ruby and Clojure are 2 examples in the last 13 years. Today, I rarely hear about them (though I am sure they could still be popular in certain places) To me,…

Really fine points.

Rust definitely has more going for it than some of the earlier hype cycles. That being said, and speaking from my own experience with Rust, there are some design choices that I suspect may pose a barrier for its widespread adoption. Rewriting small discrete components while maintaining C interop is a very fine use case for Rust - building and maintaining a large, complex, and stateful system wholly in Rust is quite another. I'd be very, very surprised if Microsoft switched en masse to Rust for their bare metal stack, at least with Rust in its current shape.

Clojure is a great parallel to bring up here, and should serve as a cautionary tale for Rust: Java was unpopular, Clojure showed that a better way was possible - but was itself just a bit too alien and hard to work with for many Java devs - so the more-familiar Kotlin swept in and carried the day. I have a sneaking suspicion that this might happen again, with C/C++ in the role of Java, Rust in the role of Clojure, and _ in the role of Kotlin. I don't quite know what the _ will be yet, but I suspect it will be a lot more accommodating to grizzled C wizards than Rust is. (I'm keeping an eye on Zig.)

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#83

Post by mustache_kimono »

masfoobar wrote: post #37
computably wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust's 1.0 was 2015. It's been 9 years. It's been adopted for core components in Firefox, and Chromium/Android are likewise moving towards adopting Rust. In general, Rust has seen broad industry adoption from the likes of FAANG, M$, etc. As far as I know, while alternatives like Zig may have their merits, they are simply nowhere close to Rust in terms of maturity and adoption. Not only would it take a decade for them…

> Rust's 1.0 was 2015. It's been 9 years. That is still pretty young... and just because something has reached 1.0 (lets say ready for production use) does not mean there wont be any major changes following it. As I mentioned, I am not a Rust programmer, but I would not be surprised there has been a lot of changes since 1.0 -- and, potentially, if you had a kernel with lots of Rust code.. trying to do upgrades is lik…

> When you compare Rust to something like Odin

Should there be some duty to approach reality in these comments?

Odin and Zig are interesting, but they are niche compared to Rust, right now. I say this knowing Rust is pretty niche itself! But Rust is on a different planet right now compared to where Odin and Zig are, etc.

> In my opinion, if Linus was still in his early 30s today, he might have rejected Rust the same way as he has C++.

I'm not sure what this says about Linus in his 30s, or the current retrogressive mood of certain C programmers. Whatever it is -- it is a (cosmic!) appeal to authority instead of a well reasoned analysis of why we should listen to this speculative Linus in his 30s, instead of Linus today.

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#84

Post by masfoobar »

mustache_kimono wrote: post #83
masfoobar wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Rust's 1.0 was 2015. It's been 9 years. That is still pretty young... and just because something has reached 1.0 (lets say ready for production use) does not mean there wont be any major changes following it. As I mentioned, I am not a Rust programmer, but I would not be surprised there has been a lot of changes since 1.0 -- and, potentially, if you had a kernel with lots of Rust code.. trying to do upgrades is lik…

> When you compare Rust to something like Odin Should there be some duty to approach reality in these comments? Odin and Zig are interesting, but they are niche compared to Rust, right now. I say this knowing Rust is pretty niche itself! But Rust is on a different planet right now compared to where Odin and Zig are, etc. > In my opinion, if Linus was still in his early 30s today, he might have rejected Rust the same…

> Should there be some duty to approach reality in these comments?

What is wrong comparing Odin to Rust... or Zig to Rust.. or Zig to Odin? These languages exists and should not be ignored simply for being labeled as `niche`

The previous commenter referred Rust as being stable because it was version 1.0 nearly 10 years ago.. and I responded why this does not mean as much as people think. From 1.0 to (now) 1.80.1 -- how much change has Rust gone through? I would take a guess and say A LOT! I am sure Rust will get more changes in the next 10 years!

This is why I think adding Rust to the kernel is 10 years premature. How much changes will need to be done to the Rust code in the next 10 years... I am guessing a lot. Comparing that with C, it is now going through the process of moving from C89 to C11. Once moved to C11 is unlikely to move for quite some time.

Just because I bring up Odin and make (valid) points why it is a better C.. does not imply I think it should be added to the Kernel. It is a young language (like Zig) and I think they both have an interesting future ahead of them. I am just as interested seeing their journey in the next 10 years.. not just Rust.

> I'm not sure what this says about Linus in his 30s

I am just stating that it is hard to know REALLY what Linus thinks about Rust. I use Age as an example because he is likely making decisions, whether he agrees or not, for the future of the kernel beyond himself. He wont be maintainer forever. Thats all I say/write on this.

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#85

Post by masfoobar »

troad wrote: post #82
masfoobar wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I quite like Rust, but these are early days, and it is not yet clear that Rust will be the language that wins this fight There has been a number of languages in 20 years that have been given hype - some more than others... yet slowly disappear into the corner. Ruby and Clojure are 2 examples in the last 13 years. Today, I rarely hear about them (though I am sure they could still be popular in certain places) To me,…

Really fine points. Rust definitely has more going for it than some of the earlier hype cycles. That being said, and speaking from my own experience with Rust, there are some design choices that I suspect may pose a barrier for its widespread adoption. Rewriting small discrete components while maintaining C interop is a very fine use case for Rust - building and maintaining a large, complex, and stateful system wholl…

Yeah I forgot to mention Kotlin.

Yes, I am keeping an eye not just on Rust -- but Zig and Odin. I personally like Odin, but I don't think it will shake off its reputation as a gaming language (like Jai) -- but I hope they change that marketing strategy.

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#86

Post by mustache_kimono »

masfoobar wrote: post #84
mustache_kimono wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you compare Rust to something like Odin Should there be some duty to approach reality in these comments? Odin and Zig are interesting, but they are niche compared to Rust, right now. I say this knowing Rust is pretty niche itself! But Rust is on a different planet right now compared to where Odin and Zig are, etc. > In my opinion, if Linus was still in his early 30s today, he might have rejected Rust the same…

> Should there be some duty to approach reality in these comments? What is wrong comparing Odin to Rust... or Zig to Rust.. or Zig to Odin? These languages exists and should not be ignored simply for being labeled as `niche` The previous commenter referred Rust as being stable because it was version 1.0 nearly 10 years ago.. and I responded why this does not mean as much as people think. From 1.0 to (now) 1.80.1 -- h…

> Comparing that with C, [the kernel] is now going through the process of moving from C89 to C11. Once moved to C11 is unlikely to move for quite some time.

Such conservatism is fine(?), but I think it really should serve some purpose. You think Rust code will change, such that... it will not be understandable? You don't actually say. Why should we be concerned?

> I am just stating that it is hard to know REALLY what Linus thinks about Rust.

Perhaps that's why it sounds so weird, to my ear, to fantasize about how he really feels beyond the concrete technical reasons he's offered.

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#87

Post by ParetoOptimal »

troad wrote: post #50
computably wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust's 1.0 was 2015. It's been 9 years. It's been adopted for core components in Firefox, and Chromium/Android are likewise moving towards adopting Rust. In general, Rust has seen broad industry adoption from the likes of FAANG, M$, etc. As far as I know, while alternatives like Zig may have their merits, they are simply nowhere close to Rust in terms of maturity and adoption. Not only would it take a decade for them…

> It's been adopted for core components in Firefox, and Chromium/Android are likewise moving towards adopting Rust. In general, Rust has seen broad industry adoption from the likes of FAANG, M$, etc. Rust has seen slight interest, but saying that companies like Microsoft are 'moving towards adopting Rust' is just flat out wrong (you realise MS make their own language stack, right? and that it's far more used than Rus…

> but saying that companies like Microsoft are 'moving towards adopting Rust' is just flat out wrong

Microsoft is making Rust a first-class system at Microsoft and investing 10 million dollars towards it apparently:

https://twiiit.com/dwizzzleMSFT/status/1720134540822520268 (nitter)

https://x.com/dwizzzleMSFT/status/1720134540822520268 (twitter)

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#88

Post by MiguelX413 »

entropicdrifter wrote: post #51
binary132 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe. but is it really FALSE? anyway, the point of the resignation is not wanting to deal with all this, not necessarily taking a side, so I’m not even disagreeing with you. But obviously, it is a disagreeable atmosphere. I don’t find that debatable, even if that’s due to people feeling paranoid about a (nonexistent?) rust religious takeover. I think we can all admit Rust definitely has its ideologues and cult acoly…

Yes, it's really false. They weren't saying that maintainers couldn't change the API nor that the maintainers who changed the API had to update the Rust part, just that they needed to tell the Rust maintainers what they did and what they intended so that they could correctly encode their underlying assumptions in code. In other words, they simply requested adequate documentation and the response was "I'M NOT LEARNING…

The religion known as C-ism is sabotaging Linux.

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#89

Post by MiguelX413 »

hitekker wrote: post #66
computably wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A short resignation email on a mailing list is about as little drama as I can imagine for, well, resigning. Perhaps by "drama" you're referring to the linked video, but watching the clip, the only drama I see is accusations like "You're trying to convince everyone to switch over to the religion as promulgated by Rust." Regardless of the technical issues, that's an ad hominem with zero technical merit.

Yes, he was pushed over the edge. But what he said is not a lie.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41401890

Re: Retiring from the Rust for Linux Project – Wedson Almeida Filho

#90

Post by MiguelX413 »

jmull wrote: post #75
steveklabnik wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if they do something that requires changes to the Rust code, the Rust for Linux folks will take care of it for them. This has been explained repeatedly.

Sure. But then that linux dev is no longer a linux dev. They are a linux C dev who needs to find a full linux dev, explain the issue, and get them to handle it. Now, if rust is only in a few corners of linux, then there isn’t much distinction between a linux C dev and a full linux dev, and it’s no big deal. But the goal appears to be to use it more extensively than that. To me, the entire approach to this is backward…

Linus already made that decision, and it was Rust.
Post reply on HN