Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

Post by bdangubic » Thu, Dec 25, 2025, 5:51 AM UTC

overgard wrote: post #30

charcircuit wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>is pretty wild How is it wild? On social media I kept seeing things like people falsely expecting the end goal would require manually reading through a million lines of code. It seemed more like people making up reasons to be mad or trying to dunk on the author.

LLMs generate lots of security issues and bugs. Just being "Rust" doesn't automatically fix that. Generating that amount of code means no human review. How could this not end in obvious disaster?

Post by philistine » Thu, Dec 25, 2025, 5:55 AM UTC

PedroBatista wrote: post #43

This whole thing is hilarious. In a time when some of Satya Nadella's chickens are coming home to roost and Windows being the most obvious example and most of their AI things quickly approaching too, it's good to laugh at their stupidity as a consolation prize. In the past Microsoft fucked up some many times but they had the absolute dominance of the market and a huge pool of talent and knowledgeable people capable o…

Post by j-o-m » Thu, Dec 25, 2025, 5:58 AM UTC

dralley wrote: post #41

j-o-m wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand this view point. How is anyone reading ‘way too much’ into the post based on what’s being discussed in this thread. A senior engineer leading a team at Microsoft saying that his goal is to rewrite/replace all C and C++ code with Rust using AI to facilitate the work is plainly saying what the comments in this thread are reacting to. No onenis reading into the statement, just plain reading. And even…

Microsoft has thousands of senior engineers and one of them engaging in this project and perhaps hiring a small handful of people does not equate to a large company-wide planned mandate.

Post by monocasa » Thu, Dec 25, 2025, 6:05 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #27

monocasa wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My read was rewriting one million lines of code per engineer month using ML to do the heavy lifting. Which is absolutely batshit. There's no way that can be reviewed properly, even if it's putting all of the review work on all of the other teams.

You’re right about the impossibility of reviewing for style, clarity, and coherence. For correctness though, Windows is famous for being insistent on backwards compatibility over timespans measured in decades and that must surely be automated to the hilt. As a third-party developer in the late 2000s I remember my boss giving me a CDROM binder (binders?) of every single OS release that Microsoft had ever put out. I as…

Post by isodev » Thu, Dec 25, 2025, 6:10 AM UTC

binary132 wrote: post #54

isodev wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey let’s not put the Rust fanatics in the same bucket as the LLM bros. One is a safe programming language, the other is an overgrown lorem ipsum text generator. We’re not the same :)

The fact that you’re both getting lumped in the same shill bucket together should give you pause.