- YouTube
www.youtube.com
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

Linus Torvalds Speaks on the the divide between Rust and C Linux developers an the future Linux. Will things like fragmentation among the open source community hurt the Linux Kernel? We’ll listen to the Creator of Linux.

For the full key note, checkout: Keynote: Linus Torvalds in Conversation with Dirk Hohndel

  • GravitySpoiled@lemmy.mlEnglish
    445·
    22 hours ago

    I don’t want to watch a video about it.

    I’d like to know it, but a couple of sentences wouldn’t have hurt

    • mac@lemm.ee
      1·
      59 minutes ago

      I also dont like videos for this stuff. Summarized using kagi’s universal summarizer, sharing here:

      • The integration of Rust into the Linux kernel has been a contentious topic, with some long-term maintainers resisting the changes required for memory-safe Rust code.
      • The debate over Rust vs. C in the Linux kernel has taken on “almost religious overtones” in certain areas, reflecting the differing design philosophies and expectations.
      • Linus Torvalds sees the Rust discussion as a positive thing, as it has “livened up some of the discussions” and shows how much people care about the kernel.
      • Not everyone in the kernel community understands everything about the kernel, and specialization is common - some focus on drivers, others on architectures, filesystems, etc. The same is true for Rust and C.
      • Linus does not think the Rust integration is a failure, as it’s still early, and even if it were, that’s how the community learns and improves.
      • The challenge is that Rust’s memory-safe architecture requires changes to the existing infrastructure, which some long-time maintainers, like the DRM subsystem people, are resistant to.
      • The Linux kernel has developed a lot of its own memory safety infrastructure over time for C, which has allowed incremental changes, whereas the Rust changes are more “in your face.”
      • Despite the struggles with Rust integration, Linus believes Linux is so widely used and entrenched that alternative “bottom-up grown-up from the start Rust kernels” are unlikely to displace it.
      • Linus sees the embedded/IoT space as an area where alternative kernels built around different languages like Rust may emerge, but does not see Linux losing its dominance as a general-purpose OS.
      • Overall, Linus views the Rust debate as a positive sign of the community’s passion and an opportunity to learn, even if the integration process is challenging.
    • blackbrook@mander.xyz
      25·
      21 hours ago

      FWIW, it’s a 9 min video and doesn’t contain anything earth shattering or easily summarized. Basically there is some friction between C and Rust devs, and Linus doesn’t think that it’s such a bad thing (there has be interesting discussion) and it’s way too early to call Rust in the kernel a failure.

        • nous@programming.devEnglish
          6·
          12 hours ago

          C is easier to get a program to compile. Rust is easier to get a program working correctly.

        • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
          52·
          14 hours ago

          And because it looks like C, JavaScript, Bash and a few others all mixed up together.

          I’ve heard Rust described as “Rust is what you get when you put all the good features of other programming languages together. You can’t read it, but it’s freaking fast!”

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          13·
          21 hours ago

          It forces you to be careful in the way it wants you to be careful. Which is fine, but it makes it a strange beastie for anyone not used to it.

              • Kairos@lemmy.today
                7·
                16 hours ago

                I feel like a garbage collector would be too much a performance hit for kernel stuff.

                • InverseParallax@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  11 hours ago

                  2 things:

                  1. It’s more the determinacy, a GC randomly fires up and your systems stops for some long amount of time. There are pauseless GCs but that’s a different nightmare.

                  2. The kernel has things similar to GCs. They’re used for more specialized tasks, and some (like rcu) are absolute nightmares that have take decades to get working.

        • PushButton@lemmy.world
          44·
          19 hours ago

          it’s more “it forces you to make it burrow checker friendly”.

          A burrow checker is not the only mechanism to write safe code. All the mess of Rust is all because this is the strategy they adopted.

          And this strategy, like everything in this world, has trade offs. It just happens that there are a lot, like, - a lot -, of trade offs, and those are insufferable when it comes to Rust…