Some worry multiple languages will make it harder to maintain this open source uber-project, others disagree
  • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
    3·
    6 days ago

    Don’t force me to deal with your shiny language of the day,

    WE HavE LegItImaTe COnCeRNs

    Exact same shit as last time, some cranky old dude with the territorial instinct of a bulldog sabotages anything to do with rust under a very thin layer of so-called technical concerns, yet refuses to partake in constructive discussion. Like, literally, the changeset is just bindings in rust/kernel? What even is there to complain about regarding maintainability of kernel/dma, given that as far as I can tell the rust devs will deal with any future incompatibilities?

    Very shameful for the kernel community that this kind of aggressive sabotage is regular and seemingly accepted. The incessant toxicity is not a good look and very discouraging to anyone thinking of contributing.

    • jwt@programming.dev
      1·
      4 days ago

      He might even have legitimate concerns, but this response is just so unconstructive. It’s solely aimed at slighting other programmers.

      • devfuuu@lemmy.world
        2·
        6 days ago

        And they wonder why the rest of the world wants to avoid and run away from that language and culture.

  • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
    1·
    6 days ago

    Rust is dead. Haven’t you heard? We’re rewriting everything in Zig now.

    Rust should be deprecated.

    On a more serious note, having a CTO at Microsoft, of all places, jump in on your side is kind of embarrassing. With one exception, code written at Microsoft has been some of the worst, most insecure, in the world.

    • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
      0·
      6 days ago

      I’d even have sympathy for this argument that introducing another language is a major undertaking (and it is!) but Linux is already full of lots of other languages (Macros, Makefile, Shell, BPF, assembly languages, Perl, Python scripts…) and developers are willing to do the work to use a language that helps solve problems Linux cares about.

      • deadcream@sopuli.xyz
        0·
        6 days ago

        That’s not a good argument. Most of these additional languages are used for separate things, like build scripts and stuff. They don’t affect actual kernel code which is C and assembler language.

        • Corbin@programming.devEnglish
          1·
          6 days ago

          Your argument is completely specious. Re-read that list. Assembly is a second language in the kernel already, and really it’s multiple languages, one per supported ISA. Perl and Python scripts are used to generate data tables; there are multiple build-time languages. eBPF is evaluated at runtime; the kernel contains bytecode loaders, JIT compilers, and capability management for it. The kernel has already paid the initial cost of setting up a chimeric build process which evaluates many different languages at many different stages.