Re: The Case for Rust (in any system)

On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 08:36:42 +0000, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
wrote:
>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.

So I think you have a good point when you talk about a pkg based FreeBSD. 

People rarely see what is right in front of their faces.  The large number of
computer languages should remind everyone of the "tower of babel" mythology.
With that in mind, I claim that there will never be a "one right and true"
language, ever. Thus, FreeBSD should be modular in that regard, allowing people
to pick what they want. That kind of modularity is not easy or quick to
implement properly, but it "should" be the way to go and at one point was the
"FreeBSD way". 

As long as we are talking "should bes", I really don't think anyone should
discuss the question "What is FreeBSD?". That will be an endless
philosophical debate, which I suspect is a red herring you threw out to make an
experiential point. 

However, now that you asked said question, I predict the discussion over -that-
question will be endless. Way to go. ;)
-- 
Dave Hayes - Computer and Internet Consultant - LA CA, USA
  >> *Opinions expressed above are entirely my own* <<

People today are in danger of drowning in information.
However, because they have been taught that information is
really useful, they are more willing to drown than they need
be.

If they could handle information, they would not have to
drown at all.