Rust (the language) hate thread

[Baguette Child]

how the fuck is a nu-language like that sustainable enough to become a part of Linux?

It isn't. Literally the only reason this is happening is because of tranny political bullshit.

 

[Coolio55]

Pffft. Use C, you fags.

Also, fuck this gay earth: Linus Torvalds: Rust For The Kernel Could Possibly Be Merged For Linux 5.20.


This is going to suck so very hard ... and to think I used to believe systemd was the biggest poison pill Linux has been force-fed in decades.

OOOooops! BaSeD wins again baybee!!!

I find it crazy that Rust of all languages made it into the kernel before something like Pascal

Strange how Pascal just vanished overnight for no discernible reason. I know that Borland going tits up was a factor but surely there were other competing compilers?

 

[306h4Ge5eJUJ]

OOOoops! BaSeD wins again baybee!!!
View attachment 3466676View attachment 3466680


Strange how Pascal just vanished overnight for no discernible reason. I know that Borland going tits up was a factor but surely there were other competing compilers?

I think it was just eclipsed by C due to the popularity of Unix. A real shame if you ask me, C/Unix was a major step backwards.

 

[Hồ Chí Minh]

Asking the important questions: Why are there so many furry rustaceans?

 

[byuu]

but apparently it'll only be used for driver development.

So "only" for by far the largest part of the kernel code base and the biggest reason to use the Linux kernel?

 

[Otis Boi]

Asking the important questions: Why are there so many furry rustaceans?

The intersection of tranny,furry,terminally online is extremely high.

 

[Hồ Chí Minh]

I can't even tell if they're serious or taking the piss any more.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32433386

 

[SandAthlete]

If the community wasn't gay, gayer and gayest, what is the tl;dr on hating it?
I've poked some C++ and I got shilled Rust. Kinda want to give it a try if it's going to be the next big thing in {currentyear}.

 

[Churros con Manteca]

I can't even tell if they're serious or taking the piss any more.

Both of them, overrating a language that its community was built upon virtue signaling with the addition of memeing has really yielded a mountain of shit hole retards which think that Rust is the fix for all when the answer is not that simple. Look, I like the language but these subhumans are really the letdown. And if it Saves Lives™ then what would be their reaction when the next missile system written in Rust developed by current hated group or nation is deployed. Ah, I know, they're going to cope, seethe and dilate.

If the community wasn't gay, gayer and gayest, what is the tl;dr on hating it?

Frankly, hating it should only be personal opinion or experience, not consensus reached due to the flamboyant autism of its community.

I've poked some C++ and I got shilled Rust. Kinda want to give it a try if it's going to be the next big thing in {currentyear}.

C++ is awesome regardless of what they say. Though if you want to give Rust a shot then you should do it while avoiding the shill obviously.

 

[Jones McCann]

If the community wasn't gay, gayer and gayest, what is the tl;dr on hating it?
I've poked some C++ and I got shilled Rust. Kinda want to give it a try if it's going to be the next big thing in {currentyear}.

I would rather use Rust than C++, the only issue is C++ has 50 years of libraries that Rust doesn't have. C++ is a bloated piece of shit, if you're going to use C++ just use C instead. It's much simpler and 20x less complexity. If you need advanced features like lambda and abstraction than use Rust (in places where you don't have to rely on a C++ library). I especially like how Rust has no concept of nullptr at all, you have something akin to a Java optional (can't remember the name) that you have to handle and either get the value or handle the fact that it's missing. There are also no exceptions that unwind the stack.

 

[The Great Milenko]

The only programming language one needs to learn is the most popular one at the time.

 

[Considered HARMful]

C++ is a bloated piece of shit, if you're going to use C++ just use C instead. It's much simpler and 20x less complexity. If you need advanced features like lambda and abstraction than use Rust (in places where you don't have to rely on a C++ library).

This is a self-contradicting take. Don't use C++ because it has features ("is bloated" (*)), use C instead. Until you want those features, then use Rust, because Reasons™.

(*) You pay only for what you use. You can write almost 1:1 pure C in C++ and still have better type system essentially for free.

 

[Jones McCann]

This is a self-contradicting take. Don't use C++ because it has features ("is bloated" (*)), use C instead. Until you want those features, then use Rust, because Reasons™.

(*) You pay only for what you use. You can write almost 1:1 pure C in C++ and still have better type system essentially for free.

C is better if you want something simple and efficient, Rust is better if you need all the complexity of a type system. There's a reason the Linux kernel is using Rust and has never approved C++. I wouldn't simply use C++ but only write C code, especially since there are paradigms in C++ that you shouldn't simply ignore, and if you're writing pure C why would you need to use C++ in the first place? If you're going to start using the type system than you should use modern C++ with the rule of 5 and smart pointers.

 

[Kosher Dill]

What does everyone think of the claim that any "safe C" you could come up with that has no runtime overhead would inevitably converge to something like Rust and borrow-checking?

This is a self-contradicting take. Don't use C++ because it has features ("is bloated" (*)), use C instead. Until you want those features

I think there's an argument to be made that at some point cramming more incongruous features into C++ really amounts to trying to write another language in C++, and at that point you should just use the language you're trying to emulate in the first place. (Similarly with "design patterns", on a higher level)
I considered lambdas to be one of those "just use another language" features until I read up on it more and learned that it's actually important for optimization that the compiler can know something is "This chunk of typed, structured code" rather than "Some int (*)(int, int) pointer".

 

[moocow]

There's a reason the Linux kernel is using Rust and has never approved C++

The former is happening because of trannies (also, there is currently no rust code in the kernel; only the capacity to build rust code in-tree as a kernel module exists). The latter happened because Linus didn't want it and was still in control of Linux back then enough to stop it before the trannies poisoned his daughter's mind and used her to compromise him.

Fun fact -- because C++ is a superset of C, you can easily write C++ code that compiles in an ABI-compatible fashion that can happily operate as a linux kernel module.

 

[Churros con Manteca]

There's a reason the Linux kernel is using Rust and has never approved C++. I wouldn't simply use C++ but only write C code, especially since there are paradigms in C++ that you shouldn't simply ignore, and if you're writing pure C why would you need to use C++ in the first place?

Though upstream has rejected C++ you can still build out-of-tree modules based on it, though with strong caveats like no exceptions (in case a version requires it), no standard library features further than standard declarations, no runtime type info (RTTI) and not every C++ version might be supported, between others. See this blog for more info. Basically, the only major features that you'll have are OOP, light templates, generics and RAII. Though it's kinda pointless since you can do pretty much anything related to the kernel with C alone.

 

[Barbussy Enjoyer]

Does this piece of shit have a standard yet or is everyone still working on codes of conduct?

You should tell @Null how much of a tranny dick sucking dumb fuck retard he is for writing the new forum software in Rust, I'm sure he would appreciate it.

Using something that's billed as a low level systems language to write a forum seems pretty retarded to me, honestly.

 

[Considered HARMful]

C is better if you want something simple and efficient, Rust is better if you need all the complexity of a type system. There's a reason the Linux kernel is using Rust and has never approved C++.

The reason is: Linus hates C++ programmers with a passion and I can't blame him. Also: C++ runtime is heavy compared to C, which makes it unsuitable for very low memory devices. I have no knowledge on the size of Rust runtime for comparison.

I wouldn't simply use C++ but only write C code, especially since there are paradigms in C++ that you shouldn't simply ignore, and if you're writing pure C why would you need to use C++ in the first place? If you're going to start using the type system than you should use modern C++ with the rule of 5 and smart pointers.

Man, I never gave a "dumb" sticker on Kiwifarms and you are this close.

If you want to state that C++ is the devil, just go ahead, I won't complain. But at least be consistent with your logic AND/OR read what I actually wrote. For example:

if you're writing pure C why would you need to use C++ in the first place

I've already stated: better type system essentially for free. "Type system" does not mean that you must use classes when we are still at the level of unsafe pointer casts. Even stupid, minor things like null-pointers and enums are better typed in C++.

And const is actually a thing in C++. On top of that you can add constexpr, consteval and constinit which while admittedly isn't "pure C" anymore due to lack of those keywords, it essentially does not introduce such big chunks of language as classes or templates.

Oh and don't get me started on how "hurr macros are better than templates durr".

I can't take seriously anyone who advocates programming in C "because it's simpler". No, it devolves extremely fast into a complex mess of either doing things by hand or cutting corners, precisely because it lacks automation provided by RAII. And where's any of that, bugs and leaks inevitably get introduced.

What does everyone think of the claim that any "safe C" you could come up with that has no runtime overhead would inevitably converge to something like Rust and borrow-checking?

Not being snarky here: define "safe C".

I think there's an argument to be made that at some point cramming more incongruous features into C++ really amounts to trying to write another language in C++, and at that point you should just use the language you're trying to emulate in the first place. (Similarly with "design patterns", on a higher level)

I will be the first to admit that C++ is the most complex piece of shit on this side of Solar System and that you can ~program in any language in C++. Yet, the most unfounded bitching and moaning (as opposite to perfectly valid bitching and moaning, and there's a lot to bitch about) comes from people who can't even properly criticize, beside NPC-repeating the meme "it's sooo complex that it has another language inside". OK, right, and?

Turns out that those "incongruous" features (*) are actually useful, even if you don't use them 80% of the time. And every now and then, even if one were to "emulate" a language with C++, it turns out that something can be done a lot easier when borrowing a feature from outside of the emulated language. I fail to see how that is a detriment for anyone, besides maybe compiler and runtime people, who need to bear the brunt of this complexity.

And every time I need to do some work in another language, I soon find it lacking. Nowhere else can I find anything similar to const-correctness and deterministic destruction. And these aren't even any of those evul complex stuff of nightmares, like variadic templates. It's basic stuff that has been in C++ since the stone age, while we're in 21st century and people are still reinventing dynamic typing or resource management.

Granted, those aren't the things that many programmers need to busy their heads with, but as I stated in either this thread or the programming thread - leave that stuff to grownups.

(*) Citation needed: which features and why are they incongruous?

I considered lambdas to be one of those "just use another language" features until I read up on it more and learned that it's actually important for optimization that the compiler can know something is "This chunk of typed, structured code" rather than "Some int (*)(int, int) pointer".

Same with templates and consts instead of #defines. Who woulda thunk it - the compiler can actually use that type information for something nice!

Using something that's billed as a low level systems language to write a forum seems pretty retarded to me, honestly.

Why tho? I mean, if the HTTP servers themselves are written in C, C++ or Rust, why not go a step further and actually write the application?

 

[Considered HARMful]

Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to address that separately.

Fun fact -- because C++ is a superset of C, you can easily write C++ code that compiles in an ABI-compatible fashion that can happily operate as a linux kernel module.

Almost. C++ is more like 99% superset (e.g. restricted pointers) and while I haven't tried to do what you say, I strongly suspect some issues might occur in those very rare corner cases.

 

[Skitarii]

>Null uses a programming language to fuck with troons
>Troons DDoS the site, making the forum unuseable
I wouldn't exactly call that a "win" for KF.

>troons lose money and can't buy HRT