TL;DR: In which the author doesn’t comprehend that Rust can do everything C can do on the same hardware, and overstates the stability of C as a language, pleading sentiment over sensibility.
Just to play devil’s advocate. Until rust gets a production ready GCC backend or LLVM gets more esoteric HW support there are probably some platforms that cannot run rust. That being said… realistically I think by the time rust becomes a large enough part of the kernel for it to matter the issue will have been sorted out as there are already 2 GCC implementations of rust in development…
The author claims to be an expert in Rust, so at least they don’t come from a standpoint of ‘I hate Rust and everyone who recommends it’ which seems to be somewhat popular
What is this modern programing method C. We need to get back to the purist programming language…
Assembly /s
Absolutely delusional.
code that is readable, auditable, and easy to port
Yeah C is the language that comes to everybody’s mind reading that. /s
C’s simplicity …
Is that simplicity currently in the room with us?
… and widespread adoption make it the best choice for this philosophy.
Ah, the asbestos argument.
If people want to run the latest kernels on hardware that isn’t maintained anymore, they need to toughen up and send patches …
… or they stick to an old kernel for their unmaintained hardware.
Both is fine to me, but that entitled Boomer attitude of “nobody should have nice things, because that would challenge status quo” needs to die.
I almost agree, but I think that supporting old hardware practically forever would be a nice thing to have.
Luckily, it doesn’t evolve anymore and given time Rust will likely have that support if it would be necessary for its role in the kernel.
