Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Because someday the programming state of the art must advance beyond 1970, and someday we must stop introducing new memory safety bugs that cause horrific vulnerabilities, and for kernel code we don't have the luxury of recompiling everything with garbage collection turned on as a band-aid for C's incurable defects.
Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
391–400 of 853 posts
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. This doesn't really matter for the argument. Most of the time you can audit unsafe blocks, in some instances the invariants you are upholding require you to consider more code. The benefit is still that you can design safe interfaces around these smaller bits of audited code. 2. I agree it's harder, I feel like most of the community knows and recognises this. > Maybe Rust proponents should spend more time on makin…
[flagged]
You are not engaging in good faith. I will stop talking to you now
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was confused but then noticed the actual headline of the submitted page: "The end of the kernel Rust experiment"
Kind of tells you something about how timidly and/or begrudgingly it’s been accepted. IMO the attitude is warranted. There is no good that comes from having higher-level code than necessary at the kernel level. The dispute is whether the kernel needs to be more modern, but it should be about what is the best tool for the job. Forget the bells-and-whistles and answer this: does the use of Rust generate a result that i…
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#394After all the resistance to Rust in the Linux Kernel, it's finally official. Kudos to the Linux Rust team!
wasn't there like a drive by maintainer rejection of something rust related that kind of disrupted the asahi project ? i can't say i followed the developments much but i do recall it being some of that classic linux kernel on broadway theater. i also wonder if that was a first domino falling of sorts for asahi, i legitimately can't tell if that project lives on anymore
Even Linus Torvalds called out Hector Martin.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/6/1292
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 01:19, Hector Martin wrote:
> > If shaming on social media does not work, then tell me what does, because I'm out of ideas.
> How about you accept the fact that maybe the problem is you.
> You think you know better. But the current process works.
> It has problems, but problems are a fact of life. There is no perfect.
> However, I will say that the social media brigading just makes me not want to have anything at all to do with your approach.
> Because if we have issues in the kernel development model, then social media sure as hell isn't the solution. The same way it sure as hell wasn't the solution to politics.
> Technical patches and discussions matter. Social media brigading - no than\k you.
> Linus
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
wasn't there like a drive by maintainer rejection of something rust related that kind of disrupted the asahi project ? i can't say i followed the developments much but i do recall it being some of that classic linux kernel on broadway theater. i also wonder if that was a first domino falling of sorts for asahi, i legitimately can't tell if that project lives on anymore
IIRC, it was not about Rust vs. C, but a commotion rooted from patch quality and not pushing people around about things. Linux Kernel team has this habit of a forceful pushback which breaks souls and hearts when prodded too much. Looks like Hector has deleted his Mastodon account, so I can't look back what he said exactly. Oh, I still have the relevant tab open. It's about code quality: https://news.ycombinator.com/i…
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is why most of the world has not been using c/c++ for decades.
I'm not on the Rust bandwagon, but statements like this make absolutely no sense. A lot of software was written in C and C++ because they were the only option for decades. If you couldn't afford garbage collection and needed direct control of the hardware there wasn't much of a choice. Had their been "safer" alternatives, it's possible those would have been used instead. It's only been in the last few years we've see…
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
wasn't there like a drive by maintainer rejection of something rust related that kind of disrupted the asahi project ? i can't say i followed the developments much but i do recall it being some of that classic linux kernel on broadway theater. i also wonder if that was a first domino falling of sorts for asahi, i legitimately can't tell if that project lives on anymore
IIRC, it was not about Rust vs. C, but a commotion rooted from patch quality and not pushing people around about things. Linux Kernel team has this habit of a forceful pushback which breaks souls and hearts when prodded too much. Looks like Hector has deleted his Mastodon account, so I can't look back what he said exactly. Oh, I still have the relevant tab open. It's about code quality: https://news.ycombinator.com/i…
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#398> Mike: rachel and i are no longer dating > > rachel: mike that's a horrible way of telling people we're married from the meme section on that page.
Good meme!
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because someday the programming state of the art must advance beyond 1970, and someday we must stop introducing new memory safety bugs that cause horrific vulnerabilities, and for kernel code we don't have the luxury of recompiling everything with garbage collection turned on as a band-aid for C's incurable defects.
The Unix/C people wrote their own kernel in the 1970s instead of invading an existing one.
Rust isn’t an invading tribe. It’s just a tool.
Re: Rust in the kernel is no longer experimental
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because someday the programming state of the art must advance beyond 1970, and someday we must stop introducing new memory safety bugs that cause horrific vulnerabilities, and for kernel code we don't have the luxury of recompiling everything with garbage collection turned on as a band-aid for C's incurable defects.
The Unix/C people wrote their own kernel in the 1970s instead of invading an existing one.