Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 22:23:45 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@puchar.net> To: Borja Marcos <borjam@sarenet.es> Cc: Antranig Vartanian <antranigv@freebsd.am>, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>, =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Goran_Meki=E6?= <meka@tilda.center> Subject: Re: The Case for Rust (in the base system) Message-ID: <3faef650-8cf9-13cd-f731-e84c6eff86ee@puchar.net> In-Reply-To: <B0D209B0-52AE-4BF7-AF2D-C3CBFCF35D1E@sarenet.es> References: <CAOtMX2hAUiWdGPtpaCJLPZB%2Bj2yzNw5DSjUmkwTi%2B%2BmyemehCA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFF117C-4E6B-4339-8A9A-391ED720C508@freebsd.am> <a1a064e5-c968-b57-c87-f9fafac7bf@puchar.net> <B0D209B0-52AE-4BF7-AF2D-C3CBFCF35D1E@sarenet.es>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> While I think I agree with the arguments against including Rust, there are programming languages that make it > really hard to manage the possible interactions between components and hence expose you to security issues. > > C is the “rust golden” example. Complexity can become unbearable and it can be compared to programming in assembler. ;) > Common argument from people that cannot program. How nice i don't have to interact with such, as i switched completely to embedded programming (real embedded, not pseudoembedded like raspberry pi). But still - i will need for many years UNIX that make sense. As well as for providing services to support my and other works, communicate etc.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3faef650-8cf9-13cd-f731-e84c6eff86ee>