Re: The Case for Rust (in the base system)

On Sun, Aug 4, 2024, 12:10 Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:

> --------
> Konstantin Belousov writes:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 11:36:52AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > These are the things to think about. We don't need to solve all of
> > > them, but the Rust ecosystem is quite a bit different than the C
> ecosystem
> > > in the details of a number of these points, so we have to address them
> > > if we want to use Rust in base with the same traits as all the other
> bits
> > > in base today (or we need to have a thoughtful discussion on paradigm
> > > shift and settle on that). [...]
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Instead of starting with integration into the build system, lets decide
> > which useful things can we implement in Rust.  Lets ignore the problems
> > of integrating (not yet written) code into the build, the problem of
> > crates that should be vendored, etc.
>
> Stop.
>
> Just Stop!
>
> Let me address kib@'s argument first:
>
> Until we recognize the difference between "a programming language" and
> "an ecosystem" these debates will lead nowhere.
>
> If we continue ignore that crucial difference, we will be repeating
> our prior mistakes instead of learning from them.
>
> Back in the mists of time we imported Perl into the base system,
> based on arguments /identical/ to what we hear now about Rust.
>
> Importing Perl almost instantly turned into a disaster.
>
> We had overlooked that Perl was not just a programming language,
> it was an ecosystem of a language /and/ an rapidly exploding number
> of Perl Modules from everybody and everywhere.

(..)


+1 :-)

--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info