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

Rust: Changes in the Core Team

blog.rust-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–16 of 16 posts

Re: Rust: Changes in the Core Team

#11

Post by ncmncm »

infamouscow wrote: post #8
ncmncm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall something about imposing Amazon corporate conventions on project governance, and people worried Amazon might start doing to Rust what Google has been doing to C++. As in that case, probably most of what Amazon wants for Rust, most other people want too, except for unlimited complexity. Corporations, by their nature, want things to be as complex as possible, regardless of what any individual -- even anyone wh…

C++ is governed by ISO, an international standards organization with 165 member nations. Rust is governed by the Rust Foundation, a US-based 501(c)6 trade association. Given that, which language do you think Evil Corp has more influence in changing?

It all depends on who is actually vocally participating, and on how interested corporate is in the results. E.g. Tuvalu does not send anybody.

Corporate does not care about the outcome of most things. When they do, the number of their employees involved can give them undue influence.

It can be surprising to outsiders both how corporations influence the process, and also that they sometimes care to.

Re: Rust: Changes in the Core Team

#12

Post by vlang1dot0 »

infamouscow wrote: post #8
ncmncm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall something about imposing Amazon corporate conventions on project governance, and people worried Amazon might start doing to Rust what Google has been doing to C++. As in that case, probably most of what Amazon wants for Rust, most other people want too, except for unlimited complexity. Corporations, by their nature, want things to be as complex as possible, regardless of what any individual -- even anyone wh…

C++ is governed by ISO, an international standards organization with 165 member nations. Rust is governed by the Rust Foundation, a US-based 501(c)6 trade association. Given that, which language do you think Evil Corp has more influence in changing?

Rust is not governed by the Rust Foundation. Rust is governed by the Core Team and the teams under them.

Re: Rust: Changes in the Core Team

#13

Post by brandmeyer »

eklitzke wrote: post #7
ncmncm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall something about imposing Amazon corporate conventions on project governance, and people worried Amazon might start doing to Rust what Google has been doing to C++. As in that case, probably most of what Amazon wants for Rust, most other people want too, except for unlimited complexity. Corporations, by their nature, want things to be as complex as possible, regardless of what any individual -- even anyone wh…

Can you elaborate on "what Google has been doing to C++"? Google has a couple of members on C++ working groups including WG21 but I'm not even remotely under the impression that C++ governance is controlled by Google.

The "Goals and Priorities for C++" document P2137 felt like an open declaration of war by GOOG and NVDA.

Re: Rust: Changes in the Core Team

#14

Post by dmix »

brandmeyer wrote: post #13
eklitzke wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on "what Google has been doing to C++"? Google has a couple of members on C++ working groups including WG21 but I'm not even remotely under the impression that C++ governance is controlled by Google.

The "Goals and Priorities for C++" document P2137 felt like an open declaration of war by GOOG and NVDA.

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p213...

Re: Rust: Changes in the Core Team

#15

Post by cyber_kinetist »

dmix wrote: post #14
brandmeyer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Goals and Priorities for C++" document P2137 felt like an open declaration of war by GOOG and NVDA.

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p213...

I mean, their goals seem very understandable given the current abysmal status of C++ (with regards to insane language complexity, historical cruft, and ergonomic issues like compile times and build systems). My only skepticism is that the thing they want might be better achieved by making a fork of C++, since there are just too many things to rip out of and replace. (Ideally something which can easily interoperate with existing C++ code, but make some huge breaking changes that simplifies and streamlines the language).

Re: Rust: Changes in the Core Team

#16

Post by brandmeyer »

cyber_kinetist wrote: post #15
dmix wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p213...

I mean, their goals seem very understandable given the current abysmal status of C++ (with regards to insane language complexity, historical cruft, and ergonomic issues like compile times and build systems). My only skepticism is that the thing they want might be better achieved by making a fork of C++, since there are just too many things to rip out of and replace. (Ideally something which can easily interoperate wi…

Its the list of non-goals that just so happen to be features that I rely on for my livelihood that drive my reaction.
Post reply on HN