I just love it when people make a programming language their personal identity said no one ever
13:45 Any Rust dev that’s told you it’s easier than C is crazy. C is easy. C is the default, and it’s a great starting place for new programmers and in college. Rust, on the other hand, was one of the most challenging languages I’ve ever learned. Too many weeks of bashing my head against the wall until just the borrow checker finally clicked.
The most tedious (aka difficult) part of kernel programming is not the language, by far. And it's not for everyone, even those with a college degree.
As a C programmer for 9 years now, I agree with you, don't like these people who talk too much
This is the conclusion I have come to also.
This is maybe a dumb whataboutism in my part, but... Drew Devault is woke as frick and he at least in the past was against Rust.
Greetings from North Carolina also. I think what you mean is that Rust in the context of Linux development is a trojan horse, the video title could be more specific.
There is a kernel developer that live streams his work. He had done it for years and then in one live stream he mentioned that he didn't like that rust is used in the kernel for some of the reasons you mentioned (technical reasons) and a few days later he got swatted while live streaming. They are activists as you say.
why would you use a programming language or engine by some insane people that can BAN you from technical service and help?
This is only partially true but because Rust is a recently built community and is plagued with woke lunatics, but on the other hand is an excellent driven project from a technical and developer experience perspective, so the only solution is bring real diversity to the rust community, and by real I mean, ideological diverse people that can stand and that try to left the politics aside.
Great points! I started worrying about your objections as I've started learning Rust and their community governance. That whole kerfufle over the Rust brand was a warning siren. I have a very based developer friend who is doing some paradigm shifting software architecture with Rust but neither of us are involved with the community and you provide good reasons to stay that way. I hadn't thought of the community culture part of integrating Rust into the Linux kernal but you're obviously right. Anything with a "Code of Conduct" on something "free" is a problem. But my question is more whether this Hegelian/Marxist bent is inherent in all "Open Source" software?
Such a shame when things get corrupted by woke ideologies.
no wonder why it's called "rust".
You've hit the nail on the head it is the gramscian ideal of "March Through The Institutions". If the language is becomes very difficult it will be filled with people who are ideologically motivated towards very particularly ideals as opposed to being focused on open source software.
Have you tried Rust? I used to hate it, but once I learned how to use it properly I started to love it. I think what you’re seeing are the idealists who think we can rewrite everything in their new favorite language. The activist type. What you’re not seeing are us Rust devs who just want to write it with our own projects. The silent majority who just appreciates good programming.
This happened at work when they allowed Kotlin to be used alongside Java. Kotlin is an alternate Java syntax since it is based on running in a JVM. Now EVERY programmer must master both Java and the Kotlin dialect and everybody is worse off. But the Kotlin people are smiling from ear-to-ear from some reason.
I think you are right and this is also why some governments are suddenly pushing for language safety to attack c and c++.
I don't understand how people think C is some very scary low level language and that there is a necessity to move to the newer ones else it will become impossible to write software, even secure software. We have seen how all other language features, from heavy OOP use, functional programming, garbage collection or whatever new paradigms Rust and other have, they didn't lead to software that doesn't crash and doesn't have bugs or security issues. In fact, a lot of these extra features are trying to hide the low level implementation in ways that you don't know anymore what happens and bugs creeping in because people don't want to think what's going on behind the hood while writing code. It's like the magic formula that will solve all your problems while nobody wants to be aware what's really going on. C is very easy. The only time I felt like moving from a language to another made a difference was from assembly. And I've written enough assembly. But I am always like 3-5x times slower to read/write assembly that I prefer to do everything at least in C. And it's high level enough if you name things nicely and have understand of the algorithms, that I just don't see it. I don't see how C++ or Python or Rust will improve my productivity. Why are people scared that there is a brain drain and they won't find people coding in C? Let alone you can have safety even in assembly if you wanted. Remember the story of Margaret Hamilton and adding safety-mechanism in the code for Apolo-11? Or think of some old software in the 80-90s that was brilliant and was written in C or assembly. And people say "but the software was not complex" and I think it was. There was software with a lot of options and menus and functionality. There was software that was ported in various platforms with more bizarre hardware than today. People were perfectly capable of writing good and safe software in C let alone assembly. But you don't have to. If you prefer C++, Python, Javascript, Rust it's fine with me. But don't tell me it's not safe to use C. They are pushing the "right way/language" to code. I agree there are woke activists. And if Rust has it, I will not prefer it. C is fine. But whatever anyone wishes, good software can be written and maintain in any language and I don't buy all the myths that it's impossible or harder to do things in C than any modern language.
This also goes into the communist idea that everything old must go. Just because it's old. Doesn't matter if it's something we rely on, that has done a great job or not. It's old, so it must be replaced by OUR version.
@garkeinbock7103