Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 18:20:40 +0000 From: Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> To: Enji Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> Cc: Hackers freeBSD <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Speculative: Rust for base system components Message-ID: <CADWvR2jjTg9VaSEVH%2B7Vx0ncAWt%2B-cyOb=kDQbqyJYuAkW5WMg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7BCC2D20-7CC5-42B1-BBD2-F3D077D59081@gmail.com> References: <201901021829.x02IT4Kc064169@slippy.cwsent.com> <e954a12f-5d23-7a3f-c29b-c93e1250965c@metricspace.net> <361CCB81-AEB6-4EAC-9604-CD8F4C63948C@gmail.com> <CADWvR2ju7y_rcY3MFe_381yBmPXgm1BA7RzA9ZTUfTtCHdFGLw@mail.gmail.com> <7BCC2D20-7CC5-42B1-BBD2-F3D077D59081@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 17:41, Enji Cooper wrote: > > Igor, > > > On Jan 3, 2019, at 08:32, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > > > > That's precisely how ideas that most people disagree with get *pushed* > > through by evangelists with confirmation bias! Like someone said > > earlier in the discussion: does Rust add anything? The answer is a > > resounding NO, save for bloat. > > And this is why one reason people say =E2=80=9CFreeBSD is dying=E2=80=9D. > > If we stuck with status quo, we wouldn=E2=80=99t have llvm, would use jus= t PowerPC/Intel architectures, libxo wouldn=E2=80=99t be a thing, we wouldn= =E2=80=99t have tests, etc. > > Calculated risks have value. But in order to prove their acceptance and u= se, you need to provide prototypes to show their usefulness, provide measur= ements, and such. Really, FreeBSD is dying because people don't want to experiment with "new toys" that have *not* been proven to be effective at what they claim to do while having been proven to be a bloat? Really, that's your argument? Well, like And there I was thinking it way dying because of long-term "issues" like this one: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D203874 that prevent me (and I suspect many many others) from virtualising FreeBSD and causing a switch to the various flavours of Linux! Like Wojciech said, absolutely nothing prevents you from forking off a branch and even re-writing the entire code in Rust, just don't turn around and say "I spend X amount of time on it therefore it must be integrated into FreeBSD-proper regardless of the numerous shortfalls"! As it stands the base install is too large as it is, and I have recompile the whole thing with a whole bunch of WITHOUTs already, and you're saying more bloatware should be added. > My point is to provide an existing service that I=E2=80=99ve seen impleme= nted more than once by FreeBSD-integrators in an ugly way, using non-modern= C/C++, or python 2.x: the former which is more difficult to maintain than = modern C/C++, and frankly was a mess; the latter which was maintainable, bu= t slow (because JIT python) and didn=E2=80=99t use base system components, = i.e., python 2.x. Maintainability is not about code, it's about people's skills and documentation, if one is inept at C, or Python, what on Earth makes you think they would write amazing code in Rust? Your argument simply doesn't follow there at all. > Tl;Dr: if you don=E2=80=99t have anything constructive to say, please ret= hink your replies and provide constructive criticism. Constructive criticis= m is welcome. Armchair nitpicking is not. Here's my constructive criticism: don't waste resources on an unproven and still-evolving language; if you have *that* much free time on your hand= s start working through BugZilla. -- Igor M.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADWvR2jjTg9VaSEVH%2B7Vx0ncAWt%2B-cyOb=kDQbqyJYuAkW5WMg>