From nobody Mon Jan 22 23:33:29 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TJmkP1jS0z58QyP for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 23:33:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jan@digitaldaemon.com) Received: from digitaldaemon.com (digitaldaemon.com [162.217.114.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4TJmkN41Gjz4hyh for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 23:33:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jan@digitaldaemon.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=digitaldaemon.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of jan@digitaldaemon.com designates 162.217.114.50 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jan@digitaldaemon.com Received: (qmail 35526 invoked by uid 89); 22 Jan 2024 23:33:29 -0000 Received: from c-69-142-153-99.hsd1.nj.comcast.net (HELO ?10.0.0.22?) (jan@digitaldaemon.com@69.142.153.99) by digitaldaemon.com with SMTP; 22 Jan 2024 23:33:29 -0000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:33:29 -0500 List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: The Case for Rust (in the base system) Content-Language: en-US To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <1673801705774097@mail.yandex.ru> <202401210751.40L7pWEF011188@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Jan Knepper In-Reply-To: <202401210751.40L7pWEF011188@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.59 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[digitaldaemon.com,reject]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:162.217.114.48/28]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[jan]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:162.217.112.0/22, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TJmkN41Gjz4hyh Second! On 1/21/24 02:51, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > -------- > Ihor Antonov writes: > >> As much as I love the idea of Rust, I don't think it is going to solve >> our problems. > The tools are /never/ the real problem. > > I will readily agree that the ISO-C people have done more to hurt > the C language, and less to improve it, than anybody else, and that > we need to deal with their continued refusal to come into the 1990'ies. > > But after I read this entire thread, the "pro" argument for Rust > seems boil down to just "all the cool kids do it". > > That exact same argument was used for "Perl in base" and "Java in > base" previously, and if we hadn't dodged those bullets, we wouldn't > be here today. > > The sprawling and loosely connected ports collection has several > strata of "all the cool kids do it" languages, and it seems to be > a much better "organism" for dealing with their eventual obsolescence, > than our tightly integrated src collection. > > I will also "second" the comment about C++ getting to be a really > good language, in particular if you play it like a violin: > > Just because you /paid/ for the entire bow, doesn't mean you > have to /play/ the entire bow. > > So rather than jump onto this or some other hypewagon-of-the-year, > only to regret it some years later and having to repay the technical > debt with interest to get it out of the tree again, I propose that > we quietly and gradually look more and more to C++ for our "advanced > needs". > > I also propose, that next time somebody advocates for importing > some "all the cool kids are doing it language" or other, we refuse > to even look at their proposal, until they have proven their skill > in, and dedication to, the language, by faithfully reimplementing > cvsup in it, and documented how and why it is a better language for > that, than Modula-3 was. > > Poul-Henning >