Comment on Linux royalty backs adoption of Rust for kernel code

• LedgeDrop@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  What?!? Actually, read the article? What is this, Reddit? /s

  Seriously, though - let me spin the question around: what, in your mind, overlaps with what Greg said?

  (plus, OP was just interested in people opinions - not whether they align/contradict with Greg, Linus, etc)

  source

  • gedhrel@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    lore.kernel.org/…/2025021954-flaccid-pucker-f7d9@…

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      For the lazy, I liked these parts:

      Rust isn’t a “silver bullet” that will solve all of our problems, but it sure will help in a huge number of places, so for new stuff going forward, why wouldn’t we want that?

      …

      Yes, I understand our overworked maintainer problem (being one of these people myself), but here we have people actually doing the work!

      The whole thing is great.

      source
    • gedhrel@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      To add something to this: linux has avoided internal SPIs for a long time. It’s often lauded as one of the reasons it hasn’t ossified.

      However, some subsystems have a huge amount of complexity and hidden constraint in how you correctly use them. Some of that may be inherent, but more of it will be accidental.

      Wrapping type-erased shims around this that attempt to capture (some of) those semantics shines a light onto the problem. The effort raises good technical questions around whether the C layer can be improved. Where maintainers have approached that with an open mind, the results are positive for both C and Rust consumers. Difficult interfaces are a source of bugs; it’s always worth asking whether that difficulty is inherent or accidental.

      source