• 5C5C5C@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Which is exactly the position that the Rust for Linux devs have understood and accepted for themselves, and yet they still get yelled at (literally, in public, on recordings) by C Linux devs for existing.

    Oh and they get snidely told that introducing the Rust language must be a mistake because suggestions to introduce other languages to the kernel turned out to be mistakes and obviously Rust is the same as all those other languages according to C developers who, by their own admission, have never used or learned anything about Rust beyond a superficial glance at some of its syntax (again this was recorded from a public event).

    • felbane@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ted Ts’o was way out of line in that conference and was clearly channeling his inner ca. 2001 Torvalds.

      I think Rust is a better path forward for a majority of the kernel/driver code maintained currently, but it is definitely going to take time for it to gain a foothold. I also think there is some condescension on both sides that is completely unjustified and needs to stop.

      The hardline C devs that don’t want to learn Rust need to accept that at some point they will have to either adapt or pass the torch, and that no amount of whining or bitching in public forums is going to change that.

      The Rust devs that are getting upset because people are “attacking” their favorite language need to accept that there will be substantial and impassioned resistance to making broad language changes to a set of projects that have existed for decades. It would be an uphill battle for any language to try to supersede C in the kernel; this is not a condemnation or attack on Rust or its zealots, it’s a matter of momentum and greybeard stubbornness.