←back to thread

247 points Klasiaster | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
akira2501 ◴[] No.41851912[source]
I personally dislike rust, but I love kernels, and so I'll always check these projects out.

This is one of the nicer ones.

It looks pretty conservative in it's use of Rust's advanced features. The code looks pretty easy to read and follow. There's actually a decent amount of comments (for rust code).

Not bad!

replies(2): >>41852794 #>>41855386 #
wg0 ◴[] No.41855386[source]
Otherwise is a decent language but what makes it difficult is the borrow semantics and lifetimes. Lifetimes are more complicated to get your head around.

But then there's this Arc, Ref, Pinning and what not - how deep is that rabbit hole?

replies(5): >>41855987 #>>41855995 #>>41856204 #>>41856306 #>>41856588 #
baq ◴[] No.41856204[source]
If you’re writing C and don’t track ownership of values, you’re in a world of hurt. Rust makes you do from day one what you could do in C but unless you have years of experience you think it isn’t necessary.
replies(2): >>41856314 #>>41856786 #
metalloid ◴[] No.41856314[source]
It was true until LLMs arrive. Feature compilers + IDEs can be integrated with LLMs to help programmers.

Rust was a great idea, before LLMs, but I don't see the motivation for Rust when LLMs can be the solution initial for C/C++ 'problems'.

replies(2): >>41856391 #>>41856419 #
1. baq ◴[] No.41856391[source]
On the contrary LLMs make using safe but constraining languages easier - you can just ask it how to do what you want in Rust, perhaps even by asking it to translate C-ish pseudocode.