Re: The Case for Rust (in any system)

> On Sep 6, 2024, at 4:37 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> 
> --------
> Antranig Vartanian writes:
> 
>> My point is: yes, we do need better languages. Yes, we do need memory-safety
>> and better tooling. But is Rust the answer?
> 
> Rust is what all the cool kids run right now, which they will deny,
> claiming that Rust Is Simply Superior in replies to this email,
> despite this prediction.
> 
> But as I said in an email a couple of days ago:  We should not
> anoint some particular subset of programming languages or other.
> 
> We should answer the question "What is FreeBSD?" in a way which
> does not contain a very short and controversial list of "approved
> programming languages".
> 
> A pkg-based FreeBSD will allow the Rust people to write good code
> for FreeBSD in Rust, and C, C++, Go, Lua, OBERON or Ada can freely
> compete with them, without causing year-long slug-fests on the
> mailing lists.
> 
> And if the INTERCAL people want to write FreeBSD kernel code in
> INTERCAL, they get to maintain whatever it takes for their
> compiler to grok the interfaces to the kernel, likewise for
> any other language.
> 
> Poul-Henning
> 
> 
> PS: I'm disappointed you did not mention Ada with SPARK.

+1

And back in the 80s, Ada was supposed to be the answer for safe coding language.

--
DE